Is it true that a 50 mm lens is really a 40 mm lens just two steps back?
No. If you move to have your subject the same size with both lenses, they will have different perspectives (e.g., the “big nose effect” with wide angle lenses used close to the subject).
It's close. The 35mm film diagonal is 43 mm but that should make little difference.
Of course, but some folk (e.g. the OP) like to wonder why a preference exists.You don't need to calculate film format diagonals to figure out which lens to use. You can just look through the viewfinder.
Perspective does not change with focal length, what does change is the angle of view. And big noses can be just as much to do with lens distortion as genes.
The perfect lens is whatever lens I happen to be selling at the time.There's IMO no perfect lens. I've used the voigtlander 1.4, the tiny 2.8, several summicron Cs and the Rollei 40mms on the Rollei 35. If i had to choose one lens its the 35mm on a Leica and the normal 80mm on a Rolleiflex. I still have a CL w a summicron C.... but would carry a 21 or 28 alongside.
And some of my UV filters say digital on them, so they only work with digital cameras:
The rule that a "standard" lens is one whose focal length is approximately equal to the diagonal of the frame probably also has roots in lens designing as well, as the diagonal has a direct relationship with the amount of necessary lens coverage.
I expect that that is how it started, and the observation that the "naturalness" of the field of view followed after that.
I had a Tamron 45/1.8 on my Canon. First tim I put it on I thought...."ahh...finally this is it. Not too long like a 50, not too short like a 40. Just right. Practically normal."
I find the 45mm far too long. I prefer the Pentax 43mm 1.9. Just right.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?