nikonpup
Senior Member
POSTED ON FACEBOOK BY BORROWLENSES.COM. https://media.giphy.com/media/l2JJu55Y2LSvkbBqo/giphy.gif
I like the concept a lot, but I wish they had slowed it down a little bit.POSTED ON FACEBOOK BY BORROWLENSES.COM. https://media.giphy.com/media/l2JJu55Y2LSvkbBqo/giphy.gif
Digital camera world ,is perhaps misleading on this.9 things you should know about using prime lenses
"An important factor to consider when you’re buying a prime lens is which focal length to go for. Back in the days of 35mm film, a 50mm prime was considered a ‘standard’ lens. That’s because it gives pretty much the same perspective as viewing a scene with the human eye, without the magnification of a telephoto lens or the shrinkage a wide-angle lens uses to squeeze more into the frame."
IMO , in common parlance , perspective includes angle of view , and so a wide angle lens does create that change in perspective , regardless of the truth that cropping down a ten degree pic to five degrees , is rather equivalent to shooting with the 5 degree lens.
At risk of sounding pedantic, I'm going to say that definition didn't sound right when I read it, and when I look up the word "perspective" online the definition you provide, "a visible scene... et al" is always the third definition, including on the Merriam Webster online dictionary.I don't think there's really any flaw in your facts as you are presenting them , I'm just aiming at the word perspective and what this means to people.
this is another definition provided by Merriam Webster
a visible scene; especially : one giving a distinctive impression of distance
*confused look* "Scene" objects or SEEN objects?But for photography, Perspective deals with the visual relationships of scene objects. IMO, that does not include angle of view, which is not a variable visual relationship of scene objects.
But for photography, Perspective deals with the visual relationships of scene objects. IMO, that does not include angle of view, which is not a variable visual relationship of scene objects.
You may have a favorite definition you like, but that doesnt mean the term doesnt have the usages other people use.At risk of sounding pedantic, I'm going to say that definition didn't sound right when I read it, and when I look up the word "perspective" online the definition you provide, "a visible scene... et al" is always the third definition, including on the Merriam Webster online dictionary.
Working as the department manager of Fine Arts department, I think I've learned what is meant, typically, by the word "perspective" and Dictionary (dot) com has the simplest, most accurate definition, based on my experience: "a technique of depicting volumes and spatial relationships on a flat surface." Most every other dictionary I look at uses this definition as the primary definition of the word "perspective". So while the definition your provide is one definition of the word, it does not appear to me to be the operative definition, the definition most people are using. It's certainly not how *I* use the word.
*confused look* "Scene" objects or SEEN objects?
You may have a favorite definition you like, but that doesnt mean the term doesnt have the usages other people use.
I dont see why y'all are being so defiant about this, I'm sure you've come across the term birds eye perspective , or broader perspective or from the perspective of the .. driver, cat , skydiver etc. The esoteric sources I keep coming across , use the therm in this way, and then routinely disavow it.
In addition to relative size, a telephoto lens can also make the distance between objects appear compressed. This can be beneficial when you're trying to emphasize the number of objects, or to enhance the appearance of congestion:
Sir, we are not fundementally in disagreement about the physics , we differ really only in what we mean by perspective , the distortion which is noticeable standing close ,, whatever the focal length is,, is not the only thing that constitutes 'perspective".ummm IMO,,Yes, there are lots of definitions, but my point was the original thread demo (thread subject, how lens selection controls portrait outcome") was blatantly the wrong notions, giving False knowledge, implications which are not true. Demo was about where we stand, but did not mention it. Demo requires a very special implied case of where we must stand to be at all true. Where we stand with our lens is all that controls the perspective effects shown. Stand in the same spot with ANY lens, and you will get the same perspective.
This is said, and it CAN BE true, UNLESS if you stand up near the near subject, then the distance to the far object is exaggerated, the opposite of compressed.
Where you stand is what matters in what will be seen. What this did not say, but should have said, is stand way back if you want to compress the distance (meaning, hide any appearance of size differences representing normal distance... it is a percentage thing). It does not matter which lens you use, you will get the same perspective if you stand in the same spot. There is simply no other answer possible, if you stand in the same spot. You see the same view there, which any lens will capture.
However yes, you will have to enlarge a wide angle view very substantially compared to a telephoto, but the perspective will be the same regardless of lens used in the same spot.
Sir, we are not fundementally in disagreement about the physics , we differ really only in what we mean by perspective , the distortion which is noticeable standing close ,, whatever the focal length is,, is not the only thing that constitutes 'perspective".ummm IMO,,
When we mentally crop the aforementioned wide angle view, to match the narrow angle view, you are removing , what I am saying, is a perspective alteration -that you ALSO are aware of.
As a practical matter , at the near distances I suspect you work , the distortion is probably very evident. I use a lot of telephoto, some macro, and in these uses , this distortion just isnt high on the list of things to combat, though my closest working distances may be between four inches and ten feet.
But if both of us were to try to take a photo from the inside of a car , as accurate to the drivers perspective as we can get , we probably will end up with something like a 35 to 50 mm lens.. (at least not from 15 feet behind the car with a 600mm.)
A misconception is that a telephoto lens affects perspective, but strictly speaking, this isn't true.
Cambridge in color calls the segment telephoto perspective... there would be no such thing! as telephoto perspective
if they were being faithful to your esoteric use of the word perspective.
Since Your position is precisely that there is no "telephoto perspective" , since perspective by you,.. and some others,, is defined by distance alone ,regardless of lens angle.
I dont think that giving a fly a big looking nose is going to hurt their feelings , and since the depth of field is almost nonexistant there is little comparing of near and far object sizes... but yes distance will change the background, as I said , we already agree on the physics.
Repeatedly for your comparison , you want to crop away portions of the image , in order to negate the differences due to focal length -angle of view. To negate differences , you have to admit that there ARE differences. The difference in perspective which you are negating is the nearness of the subject to the camera. When you look at a photo, dont you get an impression of distance ? or does the fly always look tiny whether you see it magnified or not..,, Im thinking it looks a lot closer and bigger when its filling more of the screen.
The original GIF plays with that sense of nearness, the guys face always appears the same distance from the camera.