Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Looks little bit like tilt-shift, but different. I did a quick Google image search and it seems to be used a lot for wedding photography.I'm actually intrigued because there's a technique I'd love to use a DP Merrill (with a perfectly mated lens) for but it requires a 'longer' length lens. It's called the Brenizer method and it stitches together a bunch of images to create one composite image created by a lens that couldn't possible exist (like a 35mm f0.8). And the SD1 was just too much of an investment to dabble in that.
I agree that for the Brenizer method this lens is not very well suited, since the Brenizer mehtod doesn't defy the laws of physics you can only increase the apparent sensorsize, that means you get images that look like images with a 50/2.8 lens but with a larger sensor (depending on the number of images you sticht).Peter, I really like your shots. I just recently started dabbling in stitching like this on my m4/3 camera with a 40mm f2 (80mm eq). The results are pretty cool.
Buying a fixed-lens single focal length camera is always a difficult decision. The DP3M's lens leaves a bit to be desired. I agree, the DP3M's longer lens fits well for the brenizer method, except for the fact that it's rather slow (being a 75mm f4.2 full-frame equivalent). I really wish the lens had been f1.4, or at least f2. That would make the camera far more interesting in my mind, and make it easier to hand-hold too, since the focal length is longer. The macro option adds some additional usability, but is it enough? The jury's still out for me.
I think the Brenizer method is more accurately described as a way to increase sensor size, since that is what it really does I think. it doesn't really matter for practical reasons, but it might be easier to predict what you are able to get with a certain lens. for example don't expect any wonders with a 75/1.8 for mft if you only take less than say about 9 shots, you could get the same with a 85/1.8 with a fullframe one shot... however if you take a 200/2 and a full frame you are going to get some much more extreme images.I'm actually intrigued because there's a technique I'd love to use a DP Merrill (with a perfectly mated lens) for but it requires a 'longer' length lens. It's called the Brenizer method and it stitches together a bunch of images to create one composite image created by a lens that couldn't possible exist (like a 35mm f0.8). And the SD1 was just too much of an investment to dabble in that.
What intrigues me most is that on several occasions in the 'fun with DP2M' thread posters asked for a model with a focal length like the DP3M.
Perhaps Sigma is one of the few manufacturers actually following threads at GerDPI?
I can't speak to that 1:1 ratio, but for those detail-oriented photogs, this camera should make them pleased.For every person that wants to flatter a model with soft lenses, there's another trying to make super detailed photos of an exotic looking person with a bit too much life lived.