Just how good is the 20/1.7?

Started Nov 9, 2012 | Questions thread
wy2lam Veteran Member • Posts: 3,120
Re: Just how good is the 20/1.7?

micksh6 wrote:

Pasmia wrote:

On the other hand, 25mm won't give that widish look that 20mm can. And sometimes 25mm is simply too long or too big. 40mm EFL is a good focal length because it's just a bit wider than human's FOV and you generally can fit everything what you see in the frame. But, distortion can be unpleasant if subject is close or at the edge of the frame.

50mm having the FOV of a human is a myth.  Take a picture with a 50mm and then compare the picture with what you see...the human FOV is much wider.

Around 50mm was called standard because I think it gives the same perspective as the human eye sees - i.e. "the zoom seems about right".  Even then some would argue the real standard is actually 43mm, which would make the 20/1.7 closer to normal than the PanaLeica.

 wy2lam's gear list:wy2lam's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow