I've just bought a Canon Eos 20D digital SLR, as an upgrade from my Minolta Dimage 7i. My reason for posting here is because I'm concerned and confused that the depth of field in the 20D images is a lot shallower than from the 7i.
I understand the basics about smaller aperture = greater depth of field and vice versa, and that the further the subject the greater depth of field etc. However, with the 20D it seems I have to stop the lens right down to its minimum before acceptable front-to-back sharpness occurs, which of course means I have to use a longer exposure and/or higher ISO rating.
I'm due to take pictures at a fairly well-lit indoor exhibition next week, and I chose the 20D because it got good reviews on its low-light capability and I don't want to use flash. However, if I have to open up the lens enough to allow motion-freezing 1/250 sec exposures, I'm worried that the depth of field will be too shallow to be acceptable. I need images that are sharp from front to back.
The lenses I bought with the 20D are Sigma 18-50mm and 55-200mm (I've used the 18-50mm most in testing my new 20D). The Minolta's integral zoom lens is 28-200mm, but its depth of field is much greater than the Sigma lenses.
Can anyone shed any light on this confusing subject?
Sorry to ramble, thanks in advance :-)
James
London