How much shallower is depth of field on medium format vs full frame?
Framing the same shot at f/4 and 5 meters, 44x33mm medium format (the sensor size behind Fujifilm GFX and Hasselblad X bodies) produces roughly 1.86 meters of total depth of field against full frame's roughly 2.40 meters at its own equivalent focal length — genuinely shallower, but a more modest difference than medium format's reputation for extreme background separation might suggest.
Why This Format Runs the Comparison Backward From Crop Sensors
Medium format's crop factor sits below 1.0 (roughly 0.79x for the 44x33mm size) because it's physically larger than full frame, which means matching a given field of view needs an even longer real focal length (roughly 63mm against full frame's 50mm for this framing) — the opposite direction from every crop-sensor comparison on this site. That longer real focal length narrows depth of field more than the format's larger, more tolerant circle of confusion widens it, so at matched framing, medium format still ends up shallower overall.
Why the Difference Feels Bigger in Practice Than This Number Suggests
Medium format's reputation for dramatic background separation comes from more than just this specific depth-of-field ratio — larger sensor resolution and dynamic range, and the specific character of medium-format lens rendering, all contribute to the perceived look. The raw depth-of-field math alone shows a real but genuinely moderate difference at typical apertures, not the dramatic gap the format's overall reputation might imply.
Run this comparison for your own distance and aperture in the DoF & Hyperfocal Calculator, pre-filled with the medium-format equivalent.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the larger 54x40mm medium-format sensor show an even bigger difference from full frame?
Yes — that format's crop factor runs even further below 1.0 (roughly 0.64x), requiring an even longer real focal length to match a given field of view, which produces the shallowest depth of field of any format on this site at matched framing.
Why doesn't medium format's larger circle of confusion offset the longer-lens effect the way it might seem like it should?
Because the longer real focal length needed to match framing enters the hyperfocal formula as a squared term, while the larger circle of confusion enters linearly in the denominator — the focal-length effect simply grows faster than the circle-of-confusion effect can offset it, at any realistic combination on this format.