The fallacy of 35mm "equivalent focal lengths"

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
ThrillaMozilla Veteran Member • Posts: 3,779
Re: The fallacy of 35mm "equivalent focal lengths"

I don't know how to put this gently, but you might want to reconsider how you have written this.

Tony Beach wrote:

Ironically, even here at DPR equivalent focal lengths are often divorced from a complete understanding of what is or isn't equivalent.

The DPR people have written quite clearly and correctly about this.  They really do understand it.  You might want to review here what it covers and what it doesn't.

There is this idea that if a lens covers a certain FOV on a given format then it is somehow equivalent to whatever focal length that would cover that FOV on a 35mm format camera.

By definition it is somehow equivalent.

The fallacy of 35mm "equivalent focal lengths"

It's good that you're working through this for yourself, but it's probably not a good idea to claim that you have found a fallacy.  That explains the negative reactions you have gotten.  I think you are probably confused about what equivalence covers.

 ThrillaMozilla's gear list:ThrillaMozilla's gear list
Canon EOS Rebel SL1
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow