DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Actual FOV 23 f2 not 35mm equivalent?

Started May 8, 2018 | Discussions thread
robert1955 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,302
Re: Actual FOV 23 f2 not 35mm equivalent?
4

Frodro100 wrote:

..

How else did you expect the thread to pan out, though? Did you read the OP? The topic is literally about this concept of equivalence using the assumption that it matters,

Actually, that was not at all what the OP was wanting to discuss

as if there's something magical about the so-called "classic" focal lengths made popular for 135 film cameras. Turns out, not all people accept the premise. The result was totally predictable.

Well, you are misinterpreting the premise, because that was not his Q at all. The
OP got some good answers on several levels:

- the two 23mm's indeed seem to have different AOV's

- there is much variation in the actual AOV of 35mm's for FX

- these small differences are not of importance for actual photography using one camera and one lens.

Without using equivalence [even in the very limited sens of only equivalent focal lengths] this would have been far moe complicated to discuss.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
amd
amd
amd
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow