Reading mode: Light Dark

50mm F1.4 and D60 I am CONFUSED

Go to last post
E. Blues said:
All I said was that a 50 was still a 50 when you change bodies, and that a shot from too close with a 50 would look like a shot from too close with a 50.
Click to expand...
OK:

A shot too close with a 50 on a 35mm film camera would look like a shot from too close with a 50 on a 35mm film camera.

A shot too close with a 50 on a D60 camera would look like a shot from too close with a 50 on a D60 camera.

DId I get it??
 
E,

Check my previous posts. I never said a 50mm lens will change into another focal length. I said it will act differently from a perspective standpoint.

It is clear now that

1. You don't want to understand.

2. You are trying to create enough wiggle room to save face by grabbing onto your only correct statement that a 50mm remains 50mm in focal length no matter what you mount it on. That misses the point that, though it remains the same focal length, it changes dramatically in function because of the magnification factor. This change is enough to push it into the portrait range (commonly known as the 70 to 135mm range.)

3. The other wiggle room you are trying to use is claiming a shot too close with a 50mm in one format is the same as a shot too close in another. The thing you are missing with this is you can't take the same shot with both formats, from the same distance and have the same field of view. You necessarilly have to back up with the smaller format to get the same shot. For example, if you take a frame filling head shot with the ears just inside the frame with an 50mm lens, mounted on a 35mm camera, 1 foot from the person, you would have to back 1.6 feet with the the D30 and the shot would look like it was taken with an 80mm lens. If you took the same shot with a consumer digicam, with it's tiny sensor, you would have to use something like a 12mm lens.

Even with all that you repeat to make the same mistakes.

Here are some of your mistaken comments from previous posts.

"You can use a 50 for portraits as long as you remember it's a 50, not an 80. FOV or not, if you do a tight head shot with a 50, it's going to look like a tight head shot done with a 50. Plenty of comic value in some of those."

...comment: WRONG. The same perspective tight head shot taken with a 50mm lens on the D30 will look like it was taken with an 80mm lens on a 35mm. You will have to stand further away to create this same shot.

"A 50 is a 50 before you put it on the camera. It's a 50 after you put it on the camera. It sees what a 50 sees no matter what camera it's on.

If you don't see any distortion, hey, it's OK with me."

...comment: I see less distortion when the same framed shot is taken with a 50mm on a D30 compared to a 50mm on a 35mm.

"There is ONE tight headshot on Matti's excellent page. It's a perfect example of the distortion you get when you're too close with a 50. On ANY camera."

...comment: Wrong again. It is an example of the distortion you get when you get too close with any focal length lens....not just a 50mm. Why don't we see this distortion with a 200mm lens? Because you can't get close enough to cause distortion and still frame a face in a 200mm lens.

"I've been doing head shots for a living for 25 years. It's what I do. I know what works and what doesn't. Tight head shots with a fifty doesn't."

...comment: Wrong. You've got the chicken and egg mixed up. Being too close with any focal length lens is what causes distortion. You can get closer with the 50mm on a 35mm than you can on the D30 and still frame a head so you can create more distortion.

"When I was shooting film, I was always happiest with an 85 for waist-up, 105 for head shots, and 135 for children, since they are wary of a stranger geting too close."

...comment: You've got yourself stuck on the 35mm focal length/perspective relationship again. With the D30 a 50mm will approximate that 85mm, a 65mm will approximate that 105mm and a 85mm will approximate that 135mm. You can mount those alternative lenses on the D30 and work from exactly the same distances you used to work from with their 35mm counterparts.

A 50mm lens acts differently on the D30 than it does on a 35mm camera. No law of physics change. The lens doesn't magically transform. The cropped view just requires you to back up which causes a change in the perspective.

The real answer to give people, with all your years of experience, is how far they should stand away from the subject to limit distortion to an acceptable level. For example you could say "any picture taken inside of 2 feet from the face is too close and will have an undesirable amount of distortion." It doesn't matter what lens you take it with...whether it is a 15mm lens on a consumer digicam, or a 50mm lens on a D30, or an 80mm lens on a 35mm, or a 105mm lens on a medium format camera. Too close, is too close.

Danny
 
Chris Brown said:
E. Blues wrote:

Excuse me for jumping in here,
Click to expand...
Hey, join the fun. We're having a rollicking good time.
Member said:
but nobody is going to answer this
Click to expand...
I was beginning to suspect nobody would answer. too.
Member said:
because it's a strawman question.
Click to expand...
Nah. It wasn't a question at all. What I said was:
Member said:
The lens is what it is.
Click to expand...
You didn't actually sneak back and READ what I wrote, did you? Careful. You're in danger of being identified with the wrong side. Next thing you know, somebody will start arguing with something YOU haven't said. You have been warned.
Member said:
So for general portrait work,
Click to expand...
Shooting portraits isn't work, but alas, I digress.
Member said:
Because "too close" with that lens on a 35mm body still gives you a
photograph in which you can see the whole subject. Standing in that
same spot with a D30 or D60, using the same lens, results in a
photograph where bits of the subject missing. In order to return
them to the frame, you need to step back. Voila! You are no-longer
"too close".
Click to expand...
So, you're saying that a shot taken from too close with a 50 would look like a shot taken from too close with a 50? I've heard that before somewhere, but it's kind of a hard thing to get across.

I don't get much opportunity to shoot a subject where some of her bits are missing, but I'll confess I've done it. Changing bodies didn't seem to make much of a difference.
Member said:
Hope that helps.
Click to expand...
Indubitably.

EB
 
BrGabe said:
OK:

A shot too close with a 50 on a 35mm film camera would look like
a shot from too close with a 50 on a 35mm film camera.

A shot too close with a 50 on a D60 camera would look like a shot
from too close with a 50 on a D60 camera.

DId I get it??
Click to expand...
Bingo. Give that man a seeegarrr!

EB
 
Severi Salminen said:
Severi said:
What do you think: in what way does the combination a 50mm lens +
D30 differ from 80mm lens + a 35mm camera?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
The 35mm camera has a different focal length lens on it than the D30?

Is this a trick question?
Severi said:
In what ways does a picture taken with the 1st combination
Severi said:
differ from the 2nd combination?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
One would be a digital image, and the other would be on film?

I'm VERY interested to know!

You don't know? And you're asking me? Haven't you been reading this thread? I don't know anything.
Severi said:
BTW, we are assuming the same distance to the subject and the same
subject also ;)
Click to expand...
We're assuming too much. I never shoot film and digital at the same time. I never shoot film any more at all. Anybody want to buy a really banged-up A2? It still worked when I took the battery out of it a year ago. Probably still does.

--
EB
 
E. Blues said:
E. Blues said:
I would like nothing more than to never have to post again on the
D30/D60 focal length/depth of field issue.
Click to expand...
C'mon admit it, you love it, just like the rest of us. Beats the
heck out of TV.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, every time I get wrapped up in one of these threads, I usually end up questioning whether it's worth it, and wind up taking a break from reading the board. I've quit reading this forum for up to a month in the past out of frustration. If I don't see incorrect information being posted, I won't feel compelled to correct it.
E. Blues said:
All I said was that a 50 was still a 50 when you change bodies, and
that a shot from too close with a 50 would look like a shot from too
close with a 50. You guys are arguing about stuff I never mentioned.
Click to expand...
E. Blues said:
Maybe that's why everybody's panties are riding up. They've been
arguing with something I didn't say.
Click to expand...
Well if that's what you meant to say, then your original message sure didn't state it very clearly:

"You can use a 50 for portraits as long as you remember it's a 50, not an 80. FOV or not, if you do a tight head shot with a 50, it's going to look like a tight head shot done with a 50. Plenty of comic value in some of those."

"A tight head shot" implies the 50 on a D60 is going be taking the picture from a greater distance than if the 50 is mounted on a 35mm camera.
 
Daniel Lauring said:
E,

Check my previous posts. I never said a 50mm lens will change into
another focal length. I said it will act differently from a
perspective standpoint.
Click to expand...
I didn't mention perspective at all. All I said was that a 50 was a 50, no matter what camera you put it on, and if you shoot too close with a 50, it will look like a shot from too close with a 50.
Member said:
It is clear now that

1. You don't want to understand.
Click to expand...
You're right. I don't want to understand, but shooting a few thousand portraits has left me little choice.
Member said:
2. You are trying to create enough wiggle room to save face by
grabbing onto your only correct statement that a 50mm remains 50mm
in focal length no matter what you mount it on.
Click to expand...
Have you ever SEEN my face? Man, nobody would want to save THAT. Not even me. But, as you say, I do like my wiggle room. I think maybe these jeans are too tight.

That misses the
Member said:
point that, though it remains the same focal length, it changes
dramatically in function because of the magnification factor.
Click to expand...
I didn't miss the point. That wasn't the point.
Member said:
This change is enough to push it into the portrait range (commonly known
as the 70 to 135mm range.)
Click to expand...
There's a rule somewhere about what lens is "in portrait range"? All this time I thought I could use any lens I want.
Member said:
3. The other wiggle room you are trying to use is claiming a shot
too close with a 50mm in one format is the same as a shot too close
in another.
Click to expand...
Nope. What I said was that a shot from too close with a 50 would look like a shot from too close with a 50. I didn't mention other formats because I wasn't talking about other formats. You're the one talking about other formats.
Member said:
The thing you are missing with this is you can't take
the same shot with both formats, from the same distance and have
the same field of view.
Click to expand...
Did I deny that? I don't remember denying that. I may not have even thought about it, since I wasn't talking about other formats. It's all true, of course. Everybody knows that.

Procede to part two for the exciting conclusion.
 
E. Blues said:
Daniel Lauring said:
E,
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
You necessarilly have to back up with the
E. Blues said:
smaller format to get the same shot.
Click to expand...
Of course you do. Everybody knows that, too. Of course, if you back up, you might not be too close any longer. Then how do you compare the shot taken from too close to the shot taken from NOT too close? It's easy. The shot taken from NOT too close will probably look better, unless you're one of those artsy guys that like all that distortion. If you back up too far, you might even end up in the pool. Then there'd be all these unanswered questions.
E. Blues said:
For example,
Click to expand...
Yawn.
E. Blues said:
if you take a
frame filling head
shot with a consumer digicam, with it's tiny sensor, you would have
to use something like a 12mm lens.
Click to expand...
Didn't we cover that about 27 times already? Water's wet, the sky's blue, and different focal lengths produce different images when shot from the same spot. Hot news. It doesn't get any truer, even if you say it over and over.
E. Blues said:
Even with all that you repeat to make the same mistakes.
Click to expand...
Boy, you got that right. Been a constant problem for years.
E. Blues said:
Here are some of your mistaken comments from previous posts.

"You can use a 50 for portraits as long as you remember it's a 50,
not an 80. FOV or not, if you do a tight head shot with a 50, it's
going to look like a tight head shot done with a 50. Plenty of
comic value in some of those."

...comment: WRONG.
Click to expand...
So, if I'm wrong, and you're right, you're saying that a 50 IS an 80? You're saying a too close shot with a 50 WON'T look like a too-close shot with a 50? Man, I don't know about that. I think I'll stick with a 50 being a 50, and too close being too close.
E. Blues said:
E. Blues said:
You will have to stand further away to create this same shot.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
There you go, backing up again. You're going to end up in that pool for sure. Don't say I didn't warn you. See, if you keep backing up like that, then you mess up the too close part. I was talking about shooting from too close. Depends on how far back the pool is, I guess.

Stay tuned for part three
 
I love your waterfalls pic since I shoot a lot of them. I would crop the bright area at the top as its a distraction. Well exposed shot.
John R.
 
You are sooooo right.

GREAT explanation! (you finally managed to tone down Mr. Blues...)
Chris Brown said:
E. Blues said:
Again, I'd want the one where they demonstrate how a 50 becomes
some other focal length when you change camera bodies.
Click to expand...
Excuse me for jumping in here, but nobody is going to answer this
because it's a strawman question. The lens is what it is.

When taking portraits, an important consideration is how different
parts of the subject will appear relative to each other, because of
the effects of perspective. If you stand too close to the subject,
you will get a view which looks strange, and is generally regarded
as unflattering.

So for general portrait work, it's advisable to stand at a certain
distance, so as to create a more pleasing and natural-looking image.

Now we have to consider which lens we are going to use. Let's
assume that we want the subject to fill the frame, so we have to
chose a lens that gives us an appropriate field of view, otherwise
we'd have to crop the image and waste image area (and therefore
resolution).

On a 35mm camera, an 80mm lens gives a field of view which will
nicely fill the frame for ceratin kinds of portrait work. On a D30
or D60, the smaller sensor size means that you get a smaller field
of view for any given lens, because it's using less of the image
circle than the 35mm negative. In fact, a 50mm lens pretty much
gives you the same field of view on a D30/D60 as you get with an
80mm lens on a 35mm camera.

Therefore, if we regard an 80mm lens as being a lens which offers
us a suitable framing for portraiture on an 35mm camera, we can
conlcude that a 50mm lens will give us the same suitable framing
when used with a D30 or D60.

Your "how does a 50 become an 80" question is irrelevant, and hints
at a misunderstanding about why certain lenses are chosen for
certain tasks.

You can, of course, develop a knowledge of which lenses to use for
certain situations without ever understaning the underlying reasons
why, just through a process of trial and error, or rote learning.
However, this does tend to have the nasty side effect of making you
look silly when one of the variables (in this case, field of view)
changes, and you don't realise that this causes everything you've
learned through experience and rote learning to be invalid.
Member said:
Also, from
these millions of examples, I'd want to see the one where a
photograph shot from too close with a 50 doesn't look like a
photograph shot from too close with a 50.
Click to expand...
Because "too close" with that lens on a 35mm body still gives you a
photograph in which you can see the whole subject. Standing in that
same spot with a D30 or D60, using the same lens, results in a
photograph where bits of the subject missing. In order to return
them to the frame, you need to step back. Voila! You are no-longer
"too close".

Hope that helps.
Click to expand...
 
I want to thank all that contributed to this thread for making it a truly entertaining, and thought provoking thread. I must admit, I was second guessing myself, back and forth over who was actually correct. I would like to say in closing that I believe E. Blues is sincere in his beliefs, though perhaps not theoretically correct, and MikeA was the true trol, as he disappeared right when the rubber met the road. Thanks to all, I learned something reading this thread.

Regards, Scott
Daniel Lauring said:
E. Blues said:
Daniel Lauring said:
Here is how you can prove to yourself how perspective works.
Click to expand...
Why would I want to do that?

Thanks, anyway for reducing this knotty subject to a mere 29
paragraphs, though.
Click to expand...
The length of the explanation was designed to walk you through a
experiment to show you how perspective works. It was necessarilly
long to be clear.
Member said:
Do you have, like, an index or something? I'd want to go straight
to the part where you explain how a 50 becomes a different focal
length when you change camera bodies, and how a shot done with a 50
doesn't look like a shot done with a 50. I already know all that
other stuff.
Click to expand...
I've said it. Other people have said it. We've tried to explain
it. Why do we bother? You don't seem to want to listen.

Your argument says that a shot from a 50mm, or any focal length
lens, will look the same no matter what the format. This is so
completely wrong and there is plenty of evidence to dispute it.

For example....you did say you wanted an example...look at any of
the pictures taken with any consumer digital camera like the Nikon
Coolpix, Canon G1 or 2, Olympus Cxxx series...etc, etc, etc. The
longest focal length of these cameras is about 21mm. Do all the
faces taken with these cameras look like they were taken with a
21mm lens? Of course not. Why not? Because they all have teeny,
tiny image sensors. Clearly the image sensor size must effect the
"look" of a particular focal length.

Danny
Click to expand...
 
Scott Whitney said:
I want to thank all that contributed to this thread for making it a
truly entertaining, and thought provoking thread. I must admit, I
was second guessing myself, back and forth over who was actually
correct. I would like to say in closing that I believe E. Blues is
sincere in his beliefs, though perhaps not theoretically correct,
and MikeA was the true trol, as he disappeared right when the
rubber met the road. Thanks to all, I learned something reading
this thread.
Click to expand...
Nah -- I continued to think Mr. Blues had a valid point to make and that most of the people who objected to what he'd written had utterly missed what he was getting at. That being the case, it was downright boring reading folks' "refutations" of points he hadn't made. If that's being a "true trol" [sic], so be it. But thanks just terribly for sharing that thought. :-)
 
Hi Diane

Wow, this link is still going. Looks like some sharing of information for sure.

I have the 50mm f1.4 and its quite sharp. Though I admit for the walkabout, I find it a bit too limiting. I keep it in my bag for those shots where I want..and can get, the best quality pick.

I'll comment as well...you have some "excellent" shots on your site.

Mike Byrd
http://www.mikebyrd.com
http://www.pbase.com/mikebyrd
Diane B said:
I wish it was easier to find examples here from the most used
lenses for the D30/60. I have just ordered the D60 and am now
making decisions concerning lenses. This thread is very helpful
for me. BTW--I'm convinced--the 50 f1.4 is on my list smile .

Diane
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleries
B/W lover, but color is seducing me
Click to expand...
 
Scott Whitney said:
I believe E. Blues is
sincere in his beliefs, though perhaps not theoretically correct,
and MikeA was the true trol,
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct. I'm as sincere as the day is long. The milk of rectitude flows through my veins. Glad you recognized that.

MikeA isn't a true troll. He isn't even a phony troll. Geez, he was one of two guys that actually read what I was saying and saying and saying.

Taught him a lesson, though, didn't we?

EB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top