I cut my photographic teeth on aperture priority cameras. I had to learn how depth of field worked and how to make my subject the focal point of the photo through selective focus. Of course, there are other ways of doing it, but that was one of the important techniques that I learned.
A few years ago, “bokeh” was all the rage. Lots of blogs talked about the bokeh of a particular lens and how some lenses had good, others had bad. Often times, it seemed, people forgot about the subject and just looked at the smoothness of the background.
With the current cameras, it seems that manufacturers are going with smaller sensors. 4/3, micro 4/3, and even the Nikon 1 V1, having a sensor smaller than micro 4/3.
Having used these types of P&S cameras, it seems, at least to me, that the aperture markings are superfluous. They’ve simply become almost like neutral density filters, there to only regulate the amount of light, not to control the depth of field at all. Many ‘older’ photographers are shaking off their DSLRs in favor of the smaller, lighter, more portable cameras. I favor them myself for just those reasons; however, sometimes I want control of that DOF, but it’s just not very possible with the small sensors.
Of course, the right tool for the job and this is probably why we have many cameras, other than cameras are cool technologies and we like gadgets! I realize, too, that if I want the ultimate shallow DOF, I could shoot with an 8×10 view camera … well, that’s not gonna happen. 
I used 4×5 view cameras and even though I had maximum control, it was maximum hassle. So, I suppose there are trade-offs.
Anyone else miss having that DOF control when using a P&S, or do you just do a different kind of photography when wielding you P&S camera?
Related Posts :
Creative use of DOF When finished, hopefully you'll know what is an aperture and why it's i ...
End of Summer I learned about hyperfocal distance a long time ago. I used to use it to get ma ...
Willow Dance: 1/15 sec @ f/5.6 ISO 100 As I've mentioned, I don't 'do' filters much; howeve ...
18 Responses to “Is Depth Of Field no longer important?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Paul, yeah it’s a trade off. I’ve been using a Olympus 4/3′s camera for almost nine months and i’ve missed that degree of DOF control I have with my D700. A Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 lens on my 4/3′s camera is fast enough to give back “a little” of that DOF control and recently Olympus released a number of “professional” lens — 12mm f/2, 45mm f/1.8 — which may do the same. I haven’t tried them. Still it’s a compromise but I do feel your “pain.”
Earl recently posted..So that’s the D800
I saw a review of the new Olympus camera using macro mode and it looks like it has pretty shallow DOF, but that is in macro, so at least there’s that.
it is, that’s why I’ve got Canon EOS 30D five years ago already, the best camera I ever have
the last photo with Basenji
Yorkie recently posted..Pink Gift Box Set For Your Yorkie Girl
I enjoy my small, go everywhere, old CanonG7 and sometimes it saves a situation Still, it frequently frustrates me no end. I cannot even want to get used to losing control of depth of field. I can’t imagine getting rid of my DSLR’s for anything that caused loss of that tool.
Anita Jesse recently posted..What the Heart Can Imagine
Yeah. It’s nice to be able to have the shot, but that loss of DOF control is unfortunate, especially when you are used to being able to use it to your advantage.
I agree with everything you say though for me I don’t find the lack of control with regards to DOF much of a concern. I guess my motive for making a photograph is not driven by the technical aspect of the craft though I am sure my photography would benefit if it did. In any case I think the photo industry is in some kind of flux, so to speak,fluctuating between the legacy of fim and the digital age. We’re starting to see some breakthroughs or perhaps I should say, breakouts, from the legacy mold with electronic view finders and other such things but the industry is still hanging on to concepts like ISO and aperture but I suspect these things will change in time. When noise levels become acceptable at ISO6400+ what will we care about manually setting ISO values and at some point DOF, bokeh, whatever we call it will be done through software in-camera and therfore be independent of sensor size.
Of course maybe I’m just dreaming but thanks to some manufacturers like Sony, Panasonic and Olympus I would say that it won’t be that long before we see major changes in how photos are made. By the way, have you seen the new Olympus OM-D EM-5? It’s hasn’t quite reached the point I’m talking about but it’s a small step in the right direction.
Cedric Canard recently posted..Art is dead, long live Art
Hmmm. DOF after the fact, sort of like the Lytro; however, perhaps I’m holding on to my roots, but I want to decide during the making of the photos, not afterwards. I’ve looked at the OM-D EM-5. What small step do you see in that camera that makes you think that it’s a step in the ‘right’ direction? Personally, I’d had to think that my only choice would be ISO. LOL
No, not after the fact and not like Lytro, I mean in camera. As I see it, cameras will get to a point where there will be less (if any) need for post production work. With regards to DOF you will look through your viewfinder (or at the LCD screen), focus on something and then turn a knob but instead of being in terms of aperture this knob will simply regulate the “bokeh” to what ever degree you want and to whatever depth you want. Independant of the censor size. All done with software rather than solely with hardware.
Some cameras like Sony do that already though there is still room for improvement. What I’m saying I guess is that the way we talk about making photos and the language we use is from an era that is disappearing, albeit slowly. The thing to note is that there is a generation out there that don’t know or care about ISO, aperture, focal planes, tonal range or grey cards.They just know what they like and while they may know that a “real” camera will deliver better shots than their phones they won’t switch en masse until the cameras work like their phones. And I am not just talking about filters, I’m talking about exposure control that doesn’t need a language around it. Compose, adjust until it looks how you want it and shoot. Done. No talk about f-stops, priority modes, ISO sensitivity, white balance, etc.
Whether that’s all for the best… well that’s a whole other discussion. And of course I could just be totally wrong.
You make some good points here, Cedric. I had not considered the whole in-camera aspect of it. I guess, that for me, if I could have a P&S, adjust the bokeh, or “apparent depth of focus” in the camera, then it’s as good as having a lens that does it, perhaps better. This way, I might even have my choice of ‘bokeh’ effects. That’s some pretty forward thinking; however, I’m not going to ditch the D300 just yet.
Yep, that’s pretty much why i won’t go for an X100 (although i posted a few other reasons why we didn’t get on when i borrowed one) or any of the other wide lens small sensor compacts, even if they are as pretty as an original rangefinder :/ Sure, one look at any of my stuff shows you how much I use shallow DoF!
Spose i’ll have to keep lugging the 5dII around for a while yet…
julie recently posted..never work with…
I went and read that post and, in looking at your other posts, there is no way that you could do what you do with a small sensor camera. Simply out of the question for you, Julie!
Hey, thanks for the visit
I keep trying to get away from shallow DoF being the definition of my style, but it’s pretty much one of my defining characteristics… funny because my boyfriend who owns the x100 i borrowed has hardly picked up his 5d since he got it, i think they were made for each other!
julie recently posted..never work with…
Well, your style is your style and your particular way of seeing. No reason or need to change it ‘just because’. I imagine that it will morph on its own over time. I stopped by your boyfriend’s site and had a look. Yep. He can certainly take advantage of those deep depth of field cameras, based on his style. I guess that you won’t be borrowing each others cameras much.
Shallow DOF is one of the reasons I’m struggling with my decision on the purchase of a 4/3s camera. True, they’re much better than a p&s or CX sized sensor, but the control isn’t as granular as it is in my DX Nikon. My p&s Lumix’s DOF seems to be, well, everything, so on that type of camera having aperture markings does seem superfluous. I guess a DX sensor is about as small as I care to go…
John – Visual Notebook recently posted..A Winter Blast
I’m with you, John. I own a small sensor camera, the Canon S90, and that is merely for convenience, when I just want to put a camera in my pocket just in case I see something interesting to shoot, which happens a lot; however, when I want to isolate that interesting thing, that’s when the problem starts. No good way to do it. Like you said, the DOF is everything, so it makes no difference what you select for aperture.
Well, even with the LX5 I’m always using aperture priority. It is the most natural for me, and I grew into it with my first camera (Minolta XG-1). No need to change.
Juha Haataja recently posted..Till this kind air breathed kindness everywhere
I know some photographers that set the exposure mode to AUTO and shoot away and they are quite happy with their shots. They don’t care about control of DoF as long as the main subject is reasonably sharp. I still use the preview button, mostly for macro work, and I’ve used it on pretty much every camera I owned. My guess is that it’s the least used button on DSLRs today. I also thing photographers using smaller sensor gear will adapt to the limitations of the equipment just as early 35mm shooters adapted from larger formats years ago. Evolution, you can’t stop it.
Ken Bello recently posted..THE HUMAN TOUCH
My Canon S100 can do a fairly shallow DOF if I am close up, but nothing to date really gives me the shallow DOF look I can get with a DSLR and a very fast lens. I like having the ability to make those kind of images from time to time.
Mark recently posted..Paths to Simplicity