> The other extreme is people chasing paper-thin focus, which, I guess, isn't as easy to obtain on smaller sensors.

Really? I used a nice longer (maybe 80mm equivalent) lens on an APS-C system a while ago, and it gave very shallow DoF while being much lighter and more practical (cheaper, etc.) compared to what I can find for a full frame. Not going to look up the physics but I was under the impression that shallow DoF is easier on smaller sensors (I don’t mean phone small, just crop small).

▲

vladvasiliu 5 days ago | parent [-]

Sure. But now go compare a FF 80mm with the same aperture as your 50 or similar lens used on the APS-C. The depth of field will be shallower on the FF.

> I was under the impression that shallow DoF is easier on smaller sensors (I don’t mean phone small, just crop small).

It's the reverse. These things are continuous. There's no reason for it to be easier one way, then all of a sudden stop and become increasingly difficult. Otherwise, there would be no need for shenanigans with "portrait mode".

My iPhone 14 pro's main camera is an equivalent 24 mm f/1.78. It has way much more in focus than my m4/3 12/2 (also a 24 mm equivalent).

	▲	strogonoff 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		> But now go compare a FF 80mm with the same aperture as your 50 or similar lens used on the APS-C. The depth of field will be shallower on the FF. I did not see it becoming shallower after moving to FF, but then I was using different lenses on FF (cheaper older manuals). That probably sums up what I mean. Sure, when you account for crop and adjust for the same framing then DoF will in fact be deeper on the crop practically. However, even more practically, there are small and affordable f1> lenses made for crops, whereas the brightest 100mm I used on FF is f2.8 or so because going lower they are really big and/or really expensive. So, for equivalent cost/size/weight, you may have easier time getting shallow DoF on a crop if you buy lenses specifically for crops (which admittedly limits your choice of glass).