|
|
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
sorry if the answer to this is obvious. i've looked high and low and haven't
been able to get an answer. suppose my digital slr has a 1.5x multiplication factor when using 35mm lenses. so a 50mm normal lens for 35mm film, will have the coverage of a 75mm lens when used on my digital slr. but what about the perspective? the slight compression or flattening effect that i would expect with a 75mm lens, would i get the same effect with the 50mm lens when used on the digital camera? what i'm really trying to get is this. a 50mm lens is generally not a good portrait lens when used on a 35mm camera. a 75mm lens might be more acceptable. would a 50mm lens used on a digital body (effective 75mm coverage) be an acceptable portrait lens? peter |
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
|
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
|
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
|
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
|
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
|
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
An over simplified answer. Were it so why would manufactures make so many
different lens focal lengths? The answer is correct from a technical stand point, but like many things practical issues invade reason. Ed wrote in message ... On 16 Jul 2004 02:16:09 GMT, ospam (PrincePete01) wrote: what i'm really trying to get is this....would a 50mm lens used on a digital body (effective 75mm coverage) be an acceptable portrait lens? peter Actually, it will not make any deifference at all. Lens focal length has nothing to do with perspective. In fact perspective wasn't even invintet until railroads became popular. There is no such thing as a telephoto/wide angle look. I just looks like there is a telephoto/ wideangle look and if you really knew how to look, it wouldn't look like there is a telephoto/wideangle to look at in the first place. This can be proven by always using a 7mm lens (any format) and adding a twelve foot post to your enlarger. You do have to protect your wideangle prints from nose gease because the proper viewing distance is focal length times magnification. This does mean the proper viewing distance for an 8X10inch print from a full from a 35mm camera equiped with a 500mm lens is eighty inches. Everyone know all this and in fact is a given on at least one news list. Objects in the mirror are really not closer than they apear so always burn out when in reverse gear. Heh heh heh...... |
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
An over simplified answer. Were it so why would manufactures make so many
different lens focal lengths? The answer is correct from a technical stand point, but like many things practical issues invade reason. Ed wrote in message ... On 16 Jul 2004 02:16:09 GMT, ospam (PrincePete01) wrote: what i'm really trying to get is this....would a 50mm lens used on a digital body (effective 75mm coverage) be an acceptable portrait lens? peter Actually, it will not make any deifference at all. Lens focal length has nothing to do with perspective. In fact perspective wasn't even invintet until railroads became popular. There is no such thing as a telephoto/wide angle look. I just looks like there is a telephoto/ wideangle look and if you really knew how to look, it wouldn't look like there is a telephoto/wideangle to look at in the first place. This can be proven by always using a 7mm lens (any format) and adding a twelve foot post to your enlarger. You do have to protect your wideangle prints from nose gease because the proper viewing distance is focal length times magnification. This does mean the proper viewing distance for an 8X10inch print from a full from a 35mm camera equiped with a 500mm lens is eighty inches. Everyone know all this and in fact is a given on at least one news list. Objects in the mirror are really not closer than they apear so always burn out when in reverse gear. Heh heh heh...... |
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
wrote in message ... On 16 Jul 2004 02:16:09 GMT, ospam (PrincePete01) wrote: what i'm really trying to get is this....would a 50mm lens used on a digital body (effective 75mm coverage) be an acceptable portrait lens? peter Actually, it will not make any deifference at all. Lens focal length has nothing to do with perspective. That depends on how you use the term "perspective." In the way that most people use it, it definitely is related to focal length. In fact perspective wasn't even invintet until railroads became popular. There is no such thing as a telephoto/wide angle look. I just looks like there is a telephoto/ wideangle look If it "just LOOKS" that way, then obviously there IS such a thing as a wide angle or telephoto look. and if you really knew how to look, it wouldn't look like there is a telephoto/wideangle to look at in the first place. This is the fallacy of that whole argument. People look at photos as they are, and any different appearance "if [they] really knew how to look" is irrelevant. The way this argument usually goes is something like this: If you take two photos of the same subject from the same position they have the same perspective, whether you shoot with a wide angle, normal or telephoto lens. Anyone who actually does this will see VERY OBVIOUS differences in perspective. But the argument goes along these lines: Aha, but if you took the central portion of the wide angle shot and enlarged it so that its field of view would be exactly the same as that of the normal or tele lens, then the perspective would also be exactly the same. Yes, that's true, but people DON'T do that. The full shot taken with a wide angle lens has a wide-angle perspective, and the shot taken with a telephoto lens has a telephoto perspective. If you take a wide-angle shot and crop out everything except what would appear in a telephoto shot, all you've done is EMULATED the telephoto lens. The original PERSPECTIVE has been destroyed by what you removed. This can be proven by always using a 7mm lens (any format) and adding a twelve foot post to your enlarger. You do have to protect your wideangle prints from nose gease because the proper viewing distance is focal length times magnification. But no one CARES about "proper viewing distance." If we see a shot taken with a very long telephoto, we do not put it at the far end of a room just so we can look at it in the "proper perspective." That would, in fact, defeat the whole purpose of using a long lens in the first place. Similarly, no one puts his nose down on the print just because it was shot with an ultra-wide lens. This does mean the proper viewing distance for an 8X10inch print from a full from a 35mm camera equiped with a 500mm lens is eighty inches. Everyone know all this and in fact is a given on at least one news list. This sort of nonsense has been often repeated, that much is true. It's still nonsense, no matter how often it's repeated. If it were true and/or relevant, no one would ever bother using a 500mm or other long tele lens. What would be the point, if the print had to be viewed from some unnaturally and inconveniently long distance? |
perspective w/ 35mm lenses?
wrote in message ... On 16 Jul 2004 02:16:09 GMT, ospam (PrincePete01) wrote: what i'm really trying to get is this....would a 50mm lens used on a digital body (effective 75mm coverage) be an acceptable portrait lens? peter Actually, it will not make any deifference at all. Lens focal length has nothing to do with perspective. That depends on how you use the term "perspective." In the way that most people use it, it definitely is related to focal length. In fact perspective wasn't even invintet until railroads became popular. There is no such thing as a telephoto/wide angle look. I just looks like there is a telephoto/ wideangle look If it "just LOOKS" that way, then obviously there IS such a thing as a wide angle or telephoto look. and if you really knew how to look, it wouldn't look like there is a telephoto/wideangle to look at in the first place. This is the fallacy of that whole argument. People look at photos as they are, and any different appearance "if [they] really knew how to look" is irrelevant. The way this argument usually goes is something like this: If you take two photos of the same subject from the same position they have the same perspective, whether you shoot with a wide angle, normal or telephoto lens. Anyone who actually does this will see VERY OBVIOUS differences in perspective. But the argument goes along these lines: Aha, but if you took the central portion of the wide angle shot and enlarged it so that its field of view would be exactly the same as that of the normal or tele lens, then the perspective would also be exactly the same. Yes, that's true, but people DON'T do that. The full shot taken with a wide angle lens has a wide-angle perspective, and the shot taken with a telephoto lens has a telephoto perspective. If you take a wide-angle shot and crop out everything except what would appear in a telephoto shot, all you've done is EMULATED the telephoto lens. The original PERSPECTIVE has been destroyed by what you removed. This can be proven by always using a 7mm lens (any format) and adding a twelve foot post to your enlarger. You do have to protect your wideangle prints from nose gease because the proper viewing distance is focal length times magnification. But no one CARES about "proper viewing distance." If we see a shot taken with a very long telephoto, we do not put it at the far end of a room just so we can look at it in the "proper perspective." That would, in fact, defeat the whole purpose of using a long lens in the first place. Similarly, no one puts his nose down on the print just because it was shot with an ultra-wide lens. This does mean the proper viewing distance for an 8X10inch print from a full from a 35mm camera equiped with a 500mm lens is eighty inches. Everyone know all this and in fact is a given on at least one news list. This sort of nonsense has been often repeated, that much is true. It's still nonsense, no matter how often it's repeated. If it were true and/or relevant, no one would ever bother using a 500mm or other long tele lens. What would be the point, if the print had to be viewed from some unnaturally and inconveniently long distance? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:43 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com