Digital cameras and depth of field issues

Update 1:

............................. ................................................................. ........ It turns out that's what it is... So do you know its limit? In terms of depth of field, there is a limit... *I have done some research on the frame, but I am not sure how to adjust it. Do I need to add a mirror or use photoshop? For example: GX100 : pbase/offspring/gx100 Channel width gx1018 depth of field seems to have some effect

Update 2:

Leica: boxedlight/dlux3/ Sunrise Through A Dandelion has some depth of field feel but it is different The photographer said he used a photoshop camera... So I don't know how many effects the actual camera can do... Do you think the two cameras can actually do this kind of effect, depth of field?

Update 3:

Shouldn’t have posted about the movie studio - Ranger! ! ! if I can

i would give you 20 points for your wer!!! 'cos your werin' it like it was a 20 points question and it's worth it!!!>3< oSo many Wikipedia posts have never mentioned that CCD is related...

Update 4:

"(1) The longer the focal length (e.g. 200mm vs 50mm)

The shallower the depth of field..." ↑focal length=focal length=length from lens to film, will "zoom in to the end" be shallower than "zoom out to the end"? Regarding the "macro focus range" column, is the bigger the better? or did you mean deeper? What is the 135 format? "Focal length ratio" is the ratio between focal length and focal length?

Update 5:

So if I add a lens microphone, can I solve the "focal length ratio" and "aperture" problem? And what about this series of microphones? In fact, all machines are invincible as long as they can add mirrors? How much does it usually cost to add a mirror? The plugs of the same universal brand and model can be used for both mirrors. If they are ordered with the same brand, they can be used. If they are ordered with a specific model, then they can be used?

First of all, I want to talk about the depth of field system.

What factors affect the depth of field... Depth of field refers to the inside of the frame.

The clarity before and after the focus point. Xi range.

Shallow depth of field

means the clear range is short... Deep depth of field

means the clear range is long... There are three main factors that can affect the depth of field: Focal length

Aperture size

The distance between the subject (or focus point).... (1) The longer the focal length (e.g. 200mm vs 50mm)

The shallower the depth of field... ( 2) The larger the aperture (e.g. f/2.8 vs f/8)

the shallower the depth of field... (3) the shorter the distance to the subject

the shallower the depth of field... so

What you are referring to is a photo with a "strong depth of field"

It should be a photo with a shallow depth of field... Okay

So what you mentioned above Can the compact digital camera achieve shallow depth of field? The answer is "possibly"... because the above three cameras have a very short macro focus range

For example, GX100 is 1cm... that is,

If you use it to shadow a very close object (such as a cup on the table)

Then you can It can create a shallow depth of field effect where "the subject is clear but things behind the subject (such as the entire room) are hazy"... However, because the system is limited to the left and right macro range, it is first To achieve a shallow depth of field

So

I just say "it's possible"

It doesn't necessarily mean that you want to achieve a shallow depth of field in every situation. .. In addition

You mentioned above that the gx1018

does not seem to have the effect of shallow depth of field... because the channel is blurred horizontally up and down

in the middle Clear

And the lens is a round frame

Also click horizontally to clear it first? Same as buried

He knows the position

No Caused by distance

So

this photo should be an artifact that was photoshopped later... Finally

Explain the depth of field of a lightweight digital camera Deeper than a SLR? The reason is that the "focal length ratio" is the same as the "aperture size"

and not the size of the CCD... If it is

then the manufacturer should produce a larger o CCD

Can such a lightweight digital camera use a shallow depth of field? Of course it doesn't matter... Let's use the GX100 as an example

Its focal length is compared to the 135 format It is from 24mm to 72mm

It is from wide to the focal length of a standard lens

That is, it is a short focal length... and the aperture o is towards the long focal length end (e.g. 72mm)

As a result, f/4.4 is so thin

Of course the depth of field will be deeper... and

The 72mm is only a calculated focal length

In fact

Depth of field will be determined by the ratio of the focal length to the distance between the focus point

So

use the actual focal length of GX100 5.1-15.3mm to remove the image

The depth of field is very different from that of a SLR... Zhong You

The design of a lightweight digital camera

It is intended for users with little knowledge of photography

To obtain a clear image... So

The depth of field will be designed to be deeper

To ensure a clear picture... That is to say

Channel prediction oThe left user can still get a clear image even if the focus is not accurate... So

use a lightweight digital camera

It is difficult to have a shallow depth of field

It's normal... The above is just my personal opinion

It may not be accurate

Please correct me if there are any mistakes...

In addition to the aperture and focal length of the camera, the depth of field is also based on the aperture and focal length of the camera. The size of the image sensor will have a great impact on the depth of field. The smaller the CCD photosensitive area, the deeper the depth of field it can create. Therefore, it is difficult for ordinary lightweight digital cameras to achieve the depth of field of a digital SLR. The 3 models you provided are all lightweight digital cameras. With or without a lens, they cannot produce the required effects.