Photography: It's not [only] the equipment

[treis]

@JoelUpchurch

I was mainly responding to posts 95 and 96. I had already responded to what Treis who appears to think the main reason to have a DSLR is to take pictures that are mostly blurry.

Uh no. My contribution to the thread was to point out that this blur effect was inherent to the size of the sensor, and thus could never be replicated on a phone size camera. You’ve taken that point and ran with it to parts unknown.

[JoelUpchurch]

@NoClueBoy

A 300mm f/4.0 lens (fairly common lens for many serious SLR users in the days of film) would have an aperture diameter of 75mm. The actual physical size of the aperture. A 300/2.8 (if one were lucky enough to have one) would be a little over 100mm wide. A 200 at f/6.3 (which is what many DSLR kit lenses are at max focal length) would be about 30mm wide. A 300mm with an f-stop of 6.3 (assuming kit lenses for DSLRs again) would be about 47mm wide.

Sorry I didn’t respond sooner, I spent last night over at a friends house.

If I assume it is linear with the aperture width and go back to the example of the chain link fence.
http://stopshootingauto.com/2008/01/27/shooting-through-a-fence/
If I assume the fence is 12 gauge, then the width is about 2.7mm. The lens was 50mm at f/2 when he made the fence disappear, which would be 25mm . If I extrapolate to larger apertures, then the 200mm would be 3.3mm and the 300mm would be about 5mm.

I would also like to point out that using a 200mm or 300mm lens with an APS-C lens would have rather narrow angle of view. I calculate 6.6 degrees for the 200mm and 4.4degrees for the 300mm. If you assume that bars are 200mm apart you can shoot between the bars at 1.7meters for the 200mm and 2.6meters for the 300mm.