Started Apr 19, 2011 | Discussions thread
robert1955 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,105
Re: Bad information.

I feel honored to be on your ignore list. As being on that list implies you won't be reading this response, I'm tempted not to go into your response too deeply. However:

  • the factual answer was given immediately by user dherzstein. As becomes clear from the follow-on questions by the OP it does not help much as he has at that point not gotten the frame of reference needed.

  • Angle of View came into the discussion after this statement of yours:

No. The idea of 35mm equiv. is just for framing purposes, and truthfully, only has > value if you are already familar with the framing of 35mm camera lenses. Otherwise > it's as meaningless as saying "10 kilometer" to someone who doesn't know the metric > system...there's no frame of reference.

Graystar wrote:

robert1955 wrote:

I just re-read the first part of the thread and it seems to me that either the question was not 'straigthforward' or the answers were not [or both]. For instance, it took quite some time for someone to reframe the part on 'focal length' to 'angle of view'.

Obviuusly this thread

I don't know what thread you're reading, but the question that started this thread was simply whether you use the actual focal length to calculate aperture or the 35mm effective focal length. That is a straightforward and direct question that only needs a simple "actual" to answer. “Angle of view” was never a part of the OP’s question.

At some point the OP asked for background reference and mattr gave a place to look. At that point you [and Barry Davis] reacted rather nastily, but you gave no alternative reference.

If you have a better resource you should give that

The OP didn't ask for background reference. He simply asked another question...one that isn't even addressed until page 60 of that humongous web page. How is someone supposed to find an answer in such a page when he's not even sure what he's looking for?

The OP wrote in reply to you:

Graystar wrote:

Just compare F-numbers and don't worry about the actual physical sizes of things.

Does it mean that with my sx100is which has f/2.8 on 6mm will let more light in then > > 18-55 f/3.5 on 18mm?

I'm actually an civil engineer, and i like to know technical stuff and mathematics on all > > things.

And if you think my answer was nasty then it's clear which way your perceptions are skewed. I think I'll drop you into the ignore pail rather than read another skewed response.

Well your reply to me shows [once again I might say] you are not able or willing to separate a comment on your style from a comment on the substance of your comments.

I'm not saying you should be banned for that, but I noted you expressed some hope that people disagreeing with you would be banned.

 robert1955's gear list:robert1955's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow