Rethinking focal length conventions

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 6,452
Re: Rethinking focal length conventions

Pixel Pooper wrote:

mcslsk wrote:

Not sure what the point is. As a rule of thump, a prime kit should contain lenses that double the focal lenght. So 24,50,100,200. Or 15,30,60,120. Or 20,40,80,160, as in your example.

In the wide to normal ranges I prefer closer gaps than double the focal length. For me 24 to 50 is too far and I would want a 35 in between, but 100 to 200 and 200 to 400 would be fine.

I agree, though one can always crop 24 to 35. If there is enough money, there will be enough lenses The rule, I guess, stems from the early years of photgraphy with ICLs when people could afford three lenses at the most.

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