Actual FOV 23 f2 not 35mm equivalent?

Truman Prevatt wrote:

Just Shoot Me wrote:

I'm sorry but for me your statement above makes no sense.

I grew up using a 35MM camera. I know, I got use to seeing with my minds eye, what a 21, 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, 135 and 200mm lens FOV looks like.

So when I'm choosing a lens for a particular shot I think it 35mm FF terms. So If I want slightly wider than a standard 50mm lens I go to the 35. Which for Fuji is the 23. If I want a 50mm FOV I grab the Fuji 35.

If I grew up using a camera that used a smaller film size and the whole camera and film industry was based around that smaller film size then I wouldn't need to convert to FF equivalent.

Even when I used larger format camera I converted back down to 35mm FF terms as that is the way I see the shot.

However, you are only “seeing” one optical prosperity - the acceptance angle which is important but only one optical prosperity. Sure you stand at the same location and get the same acceptance angle or field of view on a 35 mm strip of film with a 35 mm lens as you do with a 125 mm on a 4x5 inch sheet of film or a 56 mm on 6 cm x 6 cm frame defined by the diagonal of the frame. However, you will not get the same image since the aspect ratio of a 35 mm frame is 1x1.5 and the 4x5 is well 1x1.25 and 1x1 on the 6x6. In fact the images are often quite different although the are the same framing as defined be the diagonal. It is further different when the axial magnification is considered (compression along the lens axis).

Conversion to one format is gives a coarse rule of thumb on how far we need to stand for a lateral framing as defined by the film/sensor diagonal.

-- hide signature --

Truman
www.pbase.com/

You are trying to get out of your hole you dig for yourself now? 😄

Throwing in other aspect ratios here is distracting at best since bothe Fujis APS-C and FF are in 2x3 aspect ratio.

I also see and think in FF numbers, “know” how 24mm FF looks. Or 75mm an old Leica favourite.

You think, following your argument here, that the 55/56mm on the Fuji lenses is pure coincidence and people should start thinking 56?

Then grab an MFT (different aspect ratio) but still think Pana 42.5 ...

Also by sheer coincidence of course?

Deed