Ping Tony Cooper

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:18:05 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 00:06:39 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

help but know - that "long lens" is relative term and not a physical
attribute description of the lens.

it's not relative.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-focus_lens
In photography, a long-focus lens is a camera lens which has a focal
length that is longer than the diagonal measure of the film or sensor
that receives its image.

you are once again moving the goalposts and arguing against what was
never said.

Nope. The discussion is about the term "long lens", not "long-focus
lens".

nope. they are equivalent terms.

If you try Googling 'long lens' you find:

the above definition as the first hit.

But I wasn't looking for 'long focus lens'. I was looking for 'long
lens' and that is what my quotes referred to. There is a difference
you know (or perhaps you don't?).

the terms are used interchangeably, along with telephoto, which is the
most common.

I am sure you will correct me but, for practical purposes, all
telephotos are long focus but not all long focus lenses are telephoto.
For that matter, not all telephoto lenses are long either. See
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/art...onnar-135.jpeg

In this case Tony meant long as in the sense of
https://previews.123rf.com/images/pa...-long-lens.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/y9zdycmw

I still don't get what this argument is about. A telephoto is a long
lens, but it's also a type of long focus lens, and the most common
type. Regardless of the design, they both do the same thing. But back
to the basics, "normal" is pretty clearly defined as a focal length
that gives one the same field of view of human vision when looking
straight ahead. "Long" is anything above that, and "short" anything
below. None of that changes depending on a person's usage. A lens is
one of those 3 things, and absolutely nothing changes that.

There are a few people here who claim that a certain poster just wants
to argue, but in this case, it's the people disagreeing with him who
seem to just want to argue. It's insanity. This is the stupidest
argument I have ever seen here. An 85mm lens remains just that no
matter who is using it, or for what purpose.

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:20:20 -0700, Bill W
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:18:05 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 00:06:39 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

help but know - that "long lens" is relative term and not a physical
attribute description of the lens.

it's not relative.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-focus_lens
In photography, a long-focus lens is a camera lens which has a focal
length that is longer than the diagonal measure of the film or sensor
that receives its image.

you are once again moving the goalposts and arguing against what was
never said.

Nope. The discussion is about the term "long lens", not "long-focus
lens".

nope. they are equivalent terms.

If you try Googling 'long lens' you find:

the above definition as the first hit.

But I wasn't looking for 'long focus lens'. I was looking for 'long
lens' and that is what my quotes referred to. There is a difference
you know (or perhaps you don't?).

the terms are used interchangeably, along with telephoto, which is the
most common.

I am sure you will correct me but, for practical purposes, all
telephotos are long focus but not all long focus lenses are telephoto.
For that matter, not all telephoto lenses are long either. See
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/art...onnar-135.jpeg

In this case Tony meant long as in the sense of
https://previews.123rf.com/images/pa...-long-lens.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/y9zdycmw

I still don't get what this argument is about. A telephoto is a long
lens, but it's also a type of long focus lens, and the most common
type. Regardless of the design, they both do the same thing. But back
to the basics, "normal" is pretty clearly defined as a focal length
that gives one the same field of view of human vision when looking
straight ahead. "Long" is anything above that, and "short" anything
below. None of that changes depending on a person's usage. A lens is
one of those 3 things, and absolutely nothing changes that.

There are a few people here who claim that a certain poster just wants
to argue, but in this case, it's the people disagreeing with him who
seem to just want to argue. It's insanity. This is the stupidest
argument I have ever seen here. An 85mm lens remains just that no
matter who is using it, or for what purpose.

The lens is, and will always be, an 85mm lens. The argument is that
in some people's opinion, that can be a "long lens". In other
people's opinion, it is not a long lens.

This is expressed best when there is a comparison. If you have a
50mm, a 85mm, and a 150mm lens in your bag, you are likely to refer to
your 150mm lens as your long lens.

The opinion factor is in what we, individually, determine is our "long
lens" or a long lens that we would like to acquire. That does change
by individual's usage. "Long lens" is a term that each of us applies
to a lens that we think is - or is in our opinion - a "long lens".

Incidentally, I've never heard of anyone referring to their "short
lens". Your mention is the first I've seen of that. Nor have I heard
of anyone referring to their "normal lens". There is a definition
available of a "normal lens" that agrees with what you've posted, but
it's not a term that people seem to apply to lenses. Yet, people do
refer to their "long lens" by that term.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 00:25:36 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:20:20 -0700, Bill W
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:18:05 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 00:06:39 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

help but know - that "long lens" is relative term and not a physical
attribute description of the lens.

it's not relative.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-focus_lens
In photography, a long-focus lens is a camera lens which has a focal
length that is longer than the diagonal measure of the film or sensor
that receives its image.

you are once again moving the goalposts and arguing against what was
never said.

Nope. The discussion is about the term "long lens", not "long-focus
lens".

nope. they are equivalent terms.

If you try Googling 'long lens' you find:

the above definition as the first hit.

But I wasn't looking for 'long focus lens'. I was looking for 'long
lens' and that is what my quotes referred to. There is a difference
you know (or perhaps you don't?).

the terms are used interchangeably, along with telephoto, which is the
most common.

I am sure you will correct me but, for practical purposes, all
telephotos are long focus but not all long focus lenses are telephoto.
For that matter, not all telephoto lenses are long either. See
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/art...onnar-135.jpeg

In this case Tony meant long as in the sense of
https://previews.123rf.com/images/pa...-long-lens.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/y9zdycmw

I still don't get what this argument is about. A telephoto is a long
lens, but it's also a type of long focus lens, and the most common
type. Regardless of the design, they both do the same thing. But back
to the basics, "normal" is pretty clearly defined as a focal length
that gives one the same field of view of human vision when looking
straight ahead. "Long" is anything above that, and "short" anything
below. None of that changes depending on a person's usage. A lens is
one of those 3 things, and absolutely nothing changes that.

There are a few people here who claim that a certain poster just wants
to argue, but in this case, it's the people disagreeing with him who
seem to just want to argue. It's insanity. This is the stupidest
argument I have ever seen here. An 85mm lens remains just that no
matter who is using it, or for what purpose.

The lens is, and will always be, an 85mm lens. The argument is that
in some people's opinion, that can be a "long lens". In other
people's opinion, it is not a long lens.

This is expressed best when there is a comparison. If you have a
50mm, a 85mm, and a 150mm lens in your bag, you are likely to refer to
your 150mm lens as your long lens.

But what "your" long lens is, is meaningless. Both the 85 & 150 are
long by commonly accepted definitions.

The opinion factor is in what we, individually, determine is our "long
lens" or a long lens that we would like to acquire. That does change
by individual's usage. "Long lens" is a term that each of us applies
to a lens that we think is - or is in our opinion - a "long lens".

But this is like arguing without an agreed on definition - it's
pointless. If you want to talk about what you think is your long lens,
why not just use the focal length? That way, everyone will know
exactly what you're talking about. That's why there are definitions of
the lenses, so we know what each other are talking about. There *are*
definitions, so we should use those definitions, or conversations mean
nothing.

Incidentally, I've never heard of anyone referring to their "short
lens".

Wide angle?

Your mention is the first I've seen of that. Nor have I heard
of anyone referring to their "normal lens". There is a definition
available of a "normal lens" that agrees with what you've posted, but
it's not a term that people seem to apply to lenses.

I've heard "normal" used for the last 30 years, and always using the
same definition.

Yet, people do
refer to their "long lens" by that term.

Well like I said, if there is a definition, using it makes life much
easier.

On Sep 29, 2018, Tony Cooper wrote
(in ):

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:20:20 -0700, Bill
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:18:05 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 00:06:39 -0400,
wrote:

In , Eric Stevens
wrote:

help but know - that "long lens" is relative term and not a
physical
attribute description of the lens.

it's not relative.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-focus_lens
In photography, a long-focus lens is a camera lens which has a focal
length that is longer than the diagonal measure of the film or
sensor
that receives its image.

you are once again moving the goalposts and arguing against what was
never said.

Nope. The discussion is about the term "long lens", not "long-focus
lens".

nope. they are equivalent terms.

If you try Googling 'long lens' you find:

the above definition as the first hit.

But I wasn't looking for 'long focus lens'. I was looking for 'long
lens' and that is what my quotes referred to. There is a difference
you know (or perhaps you don't?).

the terms are used interchangeably, along with telephoto, which is the
most common.

I am sure you will correct me but, for practical purposes, all
telephotos are long focus but not all long focus lenses are telephoto.
For that matter, not all telephoto lenses are long either. See
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/art...onnar-135.jpeg

In this case Tony meant long as in the sense of
https://previews.123rf.com/images/pa...lfleet08100001
3/3707117-surreal-illustration-of-a-photographer-using-an-unfeasibly-long-l
ens.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/y9zdycmw

I still don't get what this argument is about. A telephoto is a long
lens, but it's also a type of long focus lens, and the most common
type. Regardless of the design, they both do the same thing. But back
to the basics, "normal" is pretty clearly defined as a focal length
that gives one the same field of view of human vision when looking
straight ahead. "Long" is anything above that, and "short" anything
below. None of that changes depending on a person's usage. A lens is
one of those 3 things, and absolutely nothing changes that.

There are a few people here who claim that a certain poster just wants
to argue, but in this case, it's the people disagreeing with him who
seem to just want to argue. It's insanity. This is the stupidest
argument I have ever seen here. An 85mm lens remains just that no
matter who is using it, or for what purpose.

The lens is, and will always be, an 85mm lens. The argument is that
in some people's opinion, that can be a "long lens". In other
people's opinion, it is not a long lens.

Some might even call that a portrait lens.

This is expressed best when there is a comparison. If you have a
50mm, a 85mm, and a 150mm lens in your bag, you are likely to refer to
your 150mm lens as your long lens.

Some might just call it the biggest lens in the bag.

The opinion factor is in what we, individually, determine is our "long
lens" or a long lens that we would like to acquire. That does change
by individual's usage. "Long lens" is a term that each of us applies
to a lens that we think is - or is in our opinion - a "long lens".

Oh Hell! Just call it, *reach out and touch you glass*.

....and for those fast ultra-wide angle prime lenses, those are labelled; *why
on earth do I have this phat hunk of glass in my bag?*

Incidentally, I've never heard of anyone referring to their "short
lens". Your mention is the first I've seen of that. Nor have I heard
of anyone referring to their "normal lens". There is a definition
available of a "normal lens" that agrees with what you've posted, but
it's not a term that people seem to apply to lenses. Yet, people do
refer to their "long lens" by that term.

“Normal� lenses seem to fall into a few categories, for FF cameras they
can be 50-55mm, for APS-C, anywhere between 30-35mm, as for M43, I am just
not prepared to do the math for a camera type I do not own, or even
considered owning.

As for “long lenses�, I have two which can be considered “long�, my
55-200mm, and my “long& phat� 100-400mm.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 21:38:45 -0700, Bill W
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 00:25:36 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:20:20 -0700, Bill W
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:18:05 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 00:06:39 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

help but know - that "long lens" is relative term and not a physical
attribute description of the lens.

it's not relative.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-focus_lens
In photography, a long-focus lens is a camera lens which has a focal
length that is longer than the diagonal measure of the film or sensor
that receives its image.

you are once again moving the goalposts and arguing against what was
never said.

Nope. The discussion is about the term "long lens", not "long-focus
lens".

nope. they are equivalent terms.

If you try Googling 'long lens' you find:

the above definition as the first hit.

But I wasn't looking for 'long focus lens'. I was looking for 'long
lens' and that is what my quotes referred to. There is a difference
you know (or perhaps you don't?).

the terms are used interchangeably, along with telephoto, which is the
most common.

I am sure you will correct me but, for practical purposes, all
telephotos are long focus but not all long focus lenses are telephoto.
For that matter, not all telephoto lenses are long either. See
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/art...onnar-135.jpeg

In this case Tony meant long as in the sense of
https://previews.123rf.com/images/pa...-long-lens.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/y9zdycmw

I still don't get what this argument is about. A telephoto is a long
lens, but it's also a type of long focus lens, and the most common
type. Regardless of the design, they both do the same thing. But back
to the basics, "normal" is pretty clearly defined as a focal length
that gives one the same field of view of human vision when looking
straight ahead. "Long" is anything above that, and "short" anything
below. None of that changes depending on a person's usage. A lens is
one of those 3 things, and absolutely nothing changes that.

There are a few people here who claim that a certain poster just wants
to argue, but in this case, it's the people disagreeing with him who
seem to just want to argue. It's insanity. This is the stupidest
argument I have ever seen here. An 85mm lens remains just that no
matter who is using it, or for what purpose.

The lens is, and will always be, an 85mm lens. The argument is that
in some people's opinion, that can be a "long lens". In other
people's opinion, it is not a long lens.

This is expressed best when there is a comparison. If you have a
50mm, a 85mm, and a 150mm lens in your bag, you are likely to refer to
your 150mm lens as your long lens.

But what "your" long lens is, is meaningless. Both the 85 & 150 are
long by commonly accepted definitions.

That's not really what's at issue here, though. The discussion is
about the term we use, and the term is "long lens". It would be a
perfectly normal conversation if someone asks me "What's your long
lens?" and I would reply "My 55-300". Both the encompassing term and
the actual description is used.

It is meaningless in that what my long lens is is not what everyone's
long lens is, but that's the point: we use the term to ask about or
describe what we or someone else has or wants.

I happen to have a 28-80 lens, but my answer to the above question
would not be "I have a 28-80 and a 55-300".


The opinion factor is in what we, individually, determine is our "long
lens" or a long lens that we would like to acquire. That does change
by individual's usage. "Long lens" is a term that each of us applies
to a lens that we think is - or is in our opinion - a "long lens".

But this is like arguing without an agreed on definition - it's
pointless. If you want to talk about what you think is your long lens,
why not just use the focal length? That way, everyone will know
exactly what you're talking about. That's why there are definitions of
the lenses, so we know what each other are talking about. There *are*
definitions, so we should use those definitions, or conversations mean
nothing.

Incidentally, I've never heard of anyone referring to their "short
lens".

Wide angle?

Yes, that would be used. But like "long lens", there is no specific
lens that is a wide angle lens. It's a handy term. There are several
lenses that can be called "wide angle".

Your mention is the first I've seen of that. Nor have I heard
of anyone referring to their "normal lens". There is a definition
available of a "normal lens" that agrees with what you've posted, but
it's not a term that people seem to apply to lenses.

I've heard "normal" used for the last 30 years, and always using the
same definition.

I haven't. In my case, I normally go out with my 18/55 lens on the
camera, but what I normally use is not what I'd call a normal lens.
It's just what's normal for me to use. Before I damaged it, the lens
I'd normally attach was my 18-270 Tamron. Great walk-about lens.

Yet, people do
refer to their "long lens" by that term.

Well like I said, if there is a definition, using it makes life much
easier.

Would you use it though?

In that question/answer I posed above would you expect anyone to ask
"What's your lens that has a focal length that is longer than the
diagonal measure of the sensor that receives the image?"

In that question/answer I posed above would you expect anyone to ask
"What lens do you have that is greater than a 50mm lens?".?

The term "long lens" is just a handy term to use.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

In article , Ken Hart
wrote:

If you try Googling 'long lens' you find:

the above definition as the first hit.

But I wasn't looking for 'long focus lens'. I was looking for 'long
lens' and that is what my quotes referred to. There is a difference
you know (or perhaps you don't?).

the terms are used interchangeably, along with telephoto, which is the
most common.

Except that not all "long" lenses are telephotos. A telephoto lens is
one in which the length of the lens is less than the focal length. For
example, my 1200mm lenses are long lenses and telephoto, as they are
about 850mm long. (They are also burdensome when you are hiking with one
on the mountain!)

yep, which i mentioned the other day.

the point is that people refer to long lenses as telephoto, regardless
if the lens is technically a telephoto. it's just how it is.

there is also no reason for a long lens to *not* be a telephoto. it's
physically shorter and reduces aberrations.

Conversely, some "short" lenses are simply short, while other are
"retrofocus". In my case (the Canon FX 1964-69), there were two 19mm
lens designs. The original 19mm extended back into the mirror box and
required the mirror to be locked in the up position. It was sold with a
viewfinder that mounted on the accessory shoe (Not a "hot-shoe" at that
time.) The later 19mm, the "19R", was a retrofocus design which could be
used without mirror lockup, or on the Canon Pellix (with it's stationary
mirror).

same for nikon. the original 6mm fisheye, which has an incredible 220
degree field of view, required mirror lockup. later versions did not.
one of the coolest lenses ever made.

https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograph...koresources/la
te70nikkor/fisheyes/6mmdual1.jpg

https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2014/11/fish_2.jpg

the mirror box forces just about all wide angle lenses to be
retrofocus. mirrorless removes that obstacle.

Different photographers have differing definitions on what they consider
to be "long" or "short" lenses. The actual definition is a comparison
with the diagonal of the image: is the focal length longer or shorter
than the diagonal? As for calling it a telephoto, is the physical length
of the lens shorter than the focal length?

technically true, but again, people use the term telephoto to mean a
long lens. it's just how it is.

I have lenses from wide-angle to long/telephoto.* Whether a lens is
"long" or "short" enough depends on the use at hand.

adding the word 'enough' changes the entire context.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

A common factor in these discussions with you is that you turn out to
be relying on a quite specific definition of a term while others are
using the term in a somewhat different sense.

that describes you.

i recall you arguing that 'pc' stands for personal computer, therefore
a mac is a pc.

except that when people hear the term 'pc', they think windows
computer, *not* a mac.

a smartphone is even *more* personal than a mac or windows computer,
yet nobody thinks of a smartphone when they hear 'pc'.

This makes me wonder:

1. How do you cope with terms for which there are two or more
distinctive definitions?

2. How do you cope with terms for which there are no clear
definitions?

3. Why is it necesssary to create specific definitions for terms
which are in general wide use?

context.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Nope. The discussion is about the term "long lens", not "long-focus
lens".

nope. they are equivalent terms.

If you try Googling 'long lens' you find:

the above definition as the first hit.

But I wasn't looking for 'long focus lens'. I was looking for 'long
lens' and that is what my quotes referred to. There is a difference
you know (or perhaps you don't?).

the terms are used interchangeably, along with telephoto, which is the
most common.

I am sure you will correct me but, for practical purposes, all
telephotos are long focus but not all long focus lenses are telephoto.

there's no need to correct you when you say something that's already
correct.

you're also missing the point.

For that matter, not all telephoto lenses are long either. See
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/art...onnar-135.jpeg

physical length means very little with modern optical designs.

for example, the sigma 50-500mm is physically 219mm long at 50mm:
https://www.dpreview.com/products/si...00_4p5-6p3_os/
specifications

the nikon 6mm fisheye is physically *much* longer than 6mm, at 171mm in
length, almost as long as the above lens (at 50mm):
https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograph...koresources/fi
sheyes/6mmf28.htm

https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2014/11/fish_2.jpg

In article , Bill W
wrote:

I still don't get what this argument is about. A telephoto is a long
lens, but it's also a type of long focus lens, and the most common
type. Regardless of the design, they both do the same thing. But back
to the basics, "normal" is pretty clearly defined as a focal length
that gives one the same field of view of human vision when looking
straight ahead. "Long" is anything above that, and "short" anything
below. None of that changes depending on a person's usage. A lens is
one of those 3 things, and absolutely nothing changes that.

yep, although normal is based on the film/sensor diagonal. human vision
is actually wider.

There are a few people here who claim that a certain poster just wants
to argue, but in this case, it's the people disagreeing with him who
seem to just want to argue. It's insanity. This is the stupidest
argument I have ever seen here. An 85mm lens remains just that no
matter who is using it, or for what purpose.

yep, although there have been worse.

the real insanity is when certain individuals argue despite agreeing.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

I still don't get what this argument is about. A telephoto is a long
lens, but it's also a type of long focus lens, and the most common
type. Regardless of the design, they both do the same thing. But back
to the basics, "normal" is pretty clearly defined as a focal length
that gives one the same field of view of human vision when looking
straight ahead. "Long" is anything above that, and "short" anything
below. None of that changes depending on a person's usage. A lens is
one of those 3 things, and absolutely nothing changes that.

There are a few people here who claim that a certain poster just wants
to argue, but in this case, it's the people disagreeing with him who
seem to just want to argue. It's insanity. This is the stupidest
argument I have ever seen here. An 85mm lens remains just that no
matter who is using it, or for what purpose.

The lens is, and will always be, an 85mm lens. The argument is that
in some people's opinion, that can be a "long lens". In other
people's opinion, it is not a long lens.

it's not a matter of opinion. 85mm is a long lens and anyone who thinks
otherwise is wrong. simple as that. you even agreed with that the other
day. changing it again so quickly?

This is expressed best when there is a comparison. If you have a
50mm, a 85mm, and a 150mm lens in your bag, you are likely to refer to
your 150mm lens as your long lens.

you might do that, but those who understand photography would refer to
*both* the 85mm and 150mm as long lenses, because that's what they both
are.