Chris Brown explained :
In article ,
G.T. wrote:
Chris Brown wrote:

It's very, very simple.

The more I read this thread the more confused I get.

35mm is the "standard" focal length for that camera.

I thought I read someone's calculation that 28mm is.

Well, the actual "normal" focal length is bewteen the two, and there's not a
lot of difference between them, so either will do the job.

Shorter is wide-angle. Longer is telephoto.

Got it.

It's not a 35mm camera, and
trying to use some sort of hybrid system where some lenses are marked with
their real focal lengths, and some marked with "equivalent" focal lengths
is a sure-fire way to maximise confusion, not minimise it.

So if one has never used a 35mm SLR then one wouldn't need to know about
1.6 (or whatever) conversion factors, right? One would just use lenses
at focal lengths shorter than 35mm (or 28mm, whichever is correct for
the particular sensor) for wide-angle, and longer for telephoto. I'm
starting to get it now.

Indeed, that's exactly it.

The argument over whether it's a "crop", a "magnification", or whatever else
is an irrelevant distraction over nomenclature, and just overcomplicates the
issue AFAICS. If someone is used to thinking in a 35mm mindset, then the
"conversion factor" may help them decide what lens to use in a given
situation. What they actually call it doesn't matter.

Also, anyone saying that you don't get the "perspective" of a normal lens
when using a 35/28 on one of these cameras is confused. Lenses don't have
any effect on perspective, which is a function of where you stand to take
the photo. The real reason the phenomenon of "telephoto flattening" occurs
is simply that to frame the same object with a telephoto lens, you have to
stand further away from it than you would with a shorter focal length.

I have the 50mm 1.8 for my new Nikon D70. It works great as a low
light/portrait lense.

--
ME!