Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 203647" data-attributes="member: 9240">We're not.&nbsp; We're really, really not.&nbsp; The dispute comes when you start equating one lens on one camera to another lens on another because of sensor size - or at least equating any aspect of the one to the other.&nbsp; It's the partial truths that happen when you do that which cause the dispute.A 50mm is a 50mm.&nbsp; A 75mm is a 75mm (if there is such a thing).&nbsp; A 50mm on a DX camera is not like a 75mm on an FX camera.&nbsp; It doesn't look the same, it doesn't feel the same.&nbsp; At best it shows the same stuff - but just a little differently.&nbsp; And that is what I'm getting at, because nothing truly equates and we need to get over it.&nbsp; The only reasonable term I've ever heard used was &quot;equivalent focal length&quot; because it suggests this similar (i.e. &quot;equivalent&quot;) field of view while equating nothing.&nbsp; To equate anything invites the question, &quot;Why doesn't one look exactly like the other?&quot;, to which the answer can only be, &quot;It doesn't and never will.&nbsp; But it's mostly like it.&quot;Truly we need to stop trying to find a way to equate the two formats in every possible way, because they are meant to be different and used &quot;as is&quot;.&nbsp; A 35mm will never equate to a medium or large format cameras, though you can start playing with lenses to capture the same subject matter, and that's all you could ever possibly do here - try to get them to look the same.&nbsp; But it can't be done.&nbsp; Unless you're both shooting a solid color, detailess wall.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BackdoorArts, post: 203647, member: 9240"] We're not. We're really, [I]really[/I] not. The dispute comes when you start equating one lens on one camera to another lens on another because of sensor size - or at least equating [I]any[/I] aspect of the one to the other. It's the partial truths that happen when you do that which cause the dispute. A 50mm is a 50mm. A 75mm is a 75mm (if there is such a thing). A 50mm on a DX camera is [I]not[/I] like a 75mm on an FX camera. It doesn't look the same, it doesn't feel the same. At best it [I]shows the same stuff - but just a little differently[/I]. And [B][I]that[/I][/B] is what I'm getting at, because nothing truly equates and we need to get over it. The only reasonable term I've ever heard used was "equivalent focal length" because it suggests this similar (i.e. "equivalent") field of view while equating nothing. To equate anything invites the question, "Why doesn't one look exactly like the other?", to which the answer can only be, "It doesn't and never will. But it's mostly like it." Truly we need to stop trying to find a way to equate the two formats in every possible way, because they are meant to be different and used "as is". A 35mm will never equate to a medium or large format cameras, though you can start playing with lenses to capture the same subject matter, and that's all you could ever possibly do here - [I]try[/I] to get them to look the same. But it can't be done. Unless you're both shooting a solid color, detailess wall. [/QUOTE]

Verification