On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 01:55:14 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Monday, 1 October 2018 18:59:22 UTC+1, -hh wrote:
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 11:16:33 AM UTC-4, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 28 September 2018 18:08:55 UTC+1, -hh wrote:
nospam wrote:
-hh wrote:
a long lens does not become not long because someone uses it in a
different manner.

Which must be why nospam not only dodged answering my two examples
of context mattering, but he furthermore deleted them from his response,
clearly in hopes that readers would not notice his dodge.

i didn't dodge anything.

Then what’s the answer for each example provided? Don’t dodge again.

i answered your question, which covered both of your examples.

Except that you dodged making a declarative statement: is my
35mm long or short?

cough I'd call that a little prick.

Yeah, I deserved that for not *pedantically* including the word "lens" :-)

In any event, this was a tricky questions for pendants, as the
lens in question is the Nikon's amphibious Nikkor 35mm for the
Nikonos, which has an integral flat port. As such, while it acts
short out of the water, it becomes a normal when used in its
primary intended application of underwater (the field of view
in air is 52 degrees, which changes to 38 degrees), as it is
equivalent to a 52mm lens.

However, in practical application, the Nikkor 35mm was broadly
considered to be a bad (undesirable) lens that everyone owned
anyway,

I didn't I've never owned an nilon or nikkor lens.

But the biggest lens I've seen in real life was a nikon 6mm fisheye in the mid 70s.


because it usually came bundled with the body, because
for the contextual application of underwater photography, it was
too "long" for most UW interests. Barring the novice who didn't
(yet) own any other lenses, virtually the only place you would ever
find it being used was with extension tubes for macro,

If you put esxtention tubes on a lens does that make the lens bigger ?
I don't know as again it depends on what a person means by size as that is as relative to an individual.

.... and the circumstances under discussion.


but even
this was largely self-fulfilling, since Nikon's macro kit only
came with framers for use with the 35mm lens; one had to seek out
a 3rd party aftermarket for framers for the more usable 28mm. Plus
shooting wide didn't really start becoming "wide enough" until 20mm,
with 15mm being the premier lens: historically, the 15mm was the
"cash cow" lens with the highest rate of success in selling covers
for the rec scuba trade magazines...

As I said it's all relative just like incest.


And how about my 60mm - long or short?

6cm still a bit on the short side.
Now if you were talking inches then that's pretty normal.

Yup. As Eric pointed out in his statement, how happy one is
with length also depends on the receptor size ...yes, I meant
to say "of the _camera_ body"!

What else might you have been talking about just any orifice.



-hh
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens