Rethinking focal length conventions

Started 9 months ago | Discussions thread
Pixel Pooper Veteran Member • Posts: 3,958
Re: Rethinking focal length conventions
1

mcslsk wrote:

Pixel Pooper wrote:

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.

True. These days zooms are much better so we don't need so many lenses anyway. I like a fast normal zoom, but If I'm shooting with a prime I only bring one and commit to that focal length, so it doesn't matter to me what else is available.

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