Rethinking focal length conventions

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
FrancoD Forum Pro • Posts: 15,576
Re: 6%
3

Phil A Martin wrote:

FrancoD wrote:

Phil A Martin wrote:

jrtrent wrote:

tko wrote:

You're thinking you need a 40 mm instead of 35 mm? Of what importance is this? How did you get this conclusion? How would a 85/80 = 6% difference in FL rock your world? I don't get this at all. It would seem like you think your numbers are better since they are "more rounded off," and you want lens manufacturers to come up with new products where the focal lengths are "prettier."

You may be right about the difference between 80 and 85 mm, but apparently there's a noticeable difference around 40mm:

"40mm is the "Perfect Normal" focal length for full-frame. Unlike 50mm lenses which often are too long or 35mm lenses which are often too wide, 40mm is always just right."

And that's from Ken Rockwell himself!

He's wrong, it's 43mm is actually the perfect focal length for full frame. It corresponds to the sensor diagonal of 43.27mm.

and that Pentax 43mm f/1.9 was so popular that dozens of people worldwide bought one.

It was an excellent lens on film and is no mean slouch on digital

no doubt but that was not my point.

What I was getting at is that because something makes sense /is right .. whatever, it does not mean that it will sell and if it does not sell there is no point in making it.

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