I’m not talking about compression. However, if I use a 24mm and a 50mm on the same camera and stand in the same spot... the photo looks different in a way that matters to me. That is what I mean... so again a 41mm lens and a 51.5mm equivalent lens looks different. It is not trivial. Moving charges everything too.
And you're neither talking about
perspective. We can only read your words and not your mind, sorry.
I still
stand by my position that a different focal length on the same camera creates a different perspective... or as this article states... the illusion of a different perspective.
I don't want to be rude but - by over-exagerating - I could say that you can also
stand by a position such as "the earth is red like an orange" if you want.
If you want to snap a kid and his kite with a particular relative size wrt the kid (as in your quote
"Perspective in photography refers to the dimension of objects and the spatial relationship between them"), there is only one position where you'll achieve this, whatever the FL. It's not technical or theoric as opposed to practical or visible : the relative size of objects is half of the composition and it matters.
Same if you want a a tree with a particular size when compared to the mountain behind : whatever the focal length, the only way to achieve the suited relative size of objects (tree and mountain) is to move to a particular point. Stay at the same point and just change FL :
it won't change the relative dimension of objects and the spatial relationship between them ; you'll just change the frame.
So technically it doesn’t change but it creates an illusion of it changing. Since I only care about how the photo looks and not the science...
Things are very simple :
- Distance changes perspective (ie relative size of objects on different focal planes)
- FL changes angle of view and as a consequence, framing
Why making so simple things more complicated than they actually are ?
The aperture is also a concept, but it translates immediately on visible attribute such as DOF. Exposure is also a concept but understanding its very basics helps to make pictures. Same with perspective : it is a concept but translates immediately on composition. Once on the field, if you have a composition in mind, better know how to achieve it.
I’m ok with being wrong and accepting I’m talking about an illusion.
https://expertphotography.com/perspective-in-photography/
“Lenses are a great way to change your perspective of a scene.
Different lenses can help you capture various perspective illusions.
Very misleadingly stated. Lenses help to frame adequately once you've move to the point where the pespective is the one you need. To compose a picture, you'll need to decide BOTH :
- a perspective (and the only way to change it is to move)
- a frame (for this, you can either zoom, or change your lens, or crop, up to your preferences)
And everybody who composes a picture does BOTH (not only one). In a similar way, so as to expose, you need to both chose an aperture and a shutter speed. And by setting both simultaneously, you'll simultaneously define DOF and motion blur. Stating that changing FL alters perspective (because you actually move at the same time) is just as misleading as stating that changing aperture affects motion blur (because you actually also change SS to maintain the same exposure).
A
telephoto lens tends to squash the subject and the background closer together. The opposite is true of ultra wide angle or
fisheye lenses.
These
wide angle lenses also make objects around the sides seem smaller. They also make the subjects in the centre much bigger than they are in reality.
These lenses also reproduce all the straight lines outside the lens axis as curved. This can alter your perception of the scene and its representational depth.
Many people think that by changing your focal length changes perspective. It may change how close you can get to a subject, yet your perspective doesn’t change.”
I could comment about each line but you get my point : just don't trust anything written on the internet.
Norjens (above) has provided an interesting youtube video, which I was not aware of, and which is very well stated IMO :
You also start the right way here
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63280486 when you understand that
"Perspective in photography refers to the dimension of objects and the spatial relationship between them". In the video above, just turn "distance distortion" into "perspective" and you're done (there is also the spatial relationship but here again, only position matters).
Nikon has a "compact" 40mm lens on it's Z road map. Tamron has a 45mm lens for DSLRs. I find that range ideal for a normal lens. 50mm is just a bit tight (and 35mm on APS-C makes it just a bit tighter) and 35mm equivalent is just wide enough to feel like a wide angle lens.
