Does one thing and does it very well!
Nice interface but...
Response from developer
OK, no problem: The current version offers the option to include or exclude the effects of diffraction.
Incorrect Calculation
Response from developer
Thanks for your kind words regarding the interface. I must point out, though, that the calculations are indeed correct. The app offers the user the option to include or exclude the effects of diffraction in the calculation of image sharpness. If you disable the diffraction option on the Settings screen, you will find that the app presents the results that you would expect.
Superb app!
This is the only DOF app photographers should use!
Here's the thing, by definition, DOF is what will "appear" in sharp focus. DOF is a sum of sensor size, focal, distance, aperture, diffraction, viewing size, viewing distance and the viewer’s interpretation. Notice that diffraction is one of the elements of DOF, not contradicting it. The app is just helping you by preventing you from using an f number that is so unsharp that you will most likely not be able to use the image (a decrease in what is in acceptable focus/sharpness). So, the app is correct. And the reviewers are correct (from a technical/math point view if diffraction is not considered), but the app is factoring in more than just math.
As a professional photography trainer, I use all of George's apps every day in my teaching and consulting. And they work! For most users, it is a bit confusing. Therefore, I highly suggest you visit the developer's website and read his articles on DOF, sharpness and diffraction. After that, you will never want to use anther DOF app again (nor should you).
Great!
Great interface
Seems pretty accurate
Technically it looks about right, but they should specify that the depth of field is still increasing at f16, f22, and so on, even though the image is becoming blurrier, which is an important difference in macro photography where diffraction limited images may be objectively better because wider apertures result in too shallow of a depth of field.
4 out of 5 only because they're treating DOF and diffraction as the same thing, otherwise this looks good and works really well.