Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

icypepsi · 10-26-2010, 10:20 AM

Hi Pentaxians,
My question is about the equivalent FoV on my K7, compared to a FF.

I have the Pentax 18-250mm (versatile, but needs an elder brother). When it reads 18mm, the FoV is equiv to about 27mm on a FF (hypothetically assuming the lens had the FoV big enough for FF), but 18mm on my K7. As for the lens on APS-C, what I see through the K7 is what I get, reading wise. But, for lenses that are made for FF, eg. when a FF lens reads 50mm, it would actually be a 75mm equiv FoV on my K7 (in other words the same FoV when my 18-250 would read as 75mm).

Here's what I don't understand. I was looking at the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 at B&H the other day paired with my K7. At 70mm it had the exact same FoV of what my 18-200mm looked when it is at 70mm. The Tamron is a FF lens. So, the Tamron at 70mm should have looked more like what my 18-250 would have when dragged to 105mm. My question is, how is the FoV the same on both when each are showing their own versions of the 70mm reading? Where am I going wrong?

Cheers..

Raylon · 10-26-2010, 10:25 AM

How the lens is built makes no difference to the focal length. All lenses are measured to 35mm film standards, not FF or APS-C. So 70mm will be the same for all lenses, regardless of what they were built for. But that 70mm would be a true 70mm on a FF, not a 1.5x crop on a APS-C, which is 105mm.

So basically a 50mm prime built for FF should be the same as a ~35mm prime on APS-C. But renaming all the formats would be very confusing, so everything is done to a single standard.

EDIT: It's kind of hard to explain just typing it out. Hopefully someone cane put it in the right words for you.

deadwolfbones · 10-26-2010, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by Raylon

So basically a 50mm prime built for FF should be the same as a ~35mm prime on APS-C. But renaming all the formats would be very confusing, so everything is done to a single standard.

You were doing well until you got to this, and then it got confusing again.

I think what you MEANT to say above is:

"So basically a FF 50mm prime mounted on a FF camera will have the same FOV as a ~35mm prime on an APS-C camera. But renaming all the formats would be very confusing, so everything is done to a single standard."

But your basic sentiment was correct: 70mm is 70mm no matter what format the lens is intended for. It's the sensor that crops FOV, not the lens.

flyer · 10-26-2010, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by Raylon

H All lenses are measured to 35mm film standards, .

Wrong. The focal length is measured through the (apparent) optical center of the lens. APS-C, FF or medium format has nothing to do with it.

70 mm is always 70 mm. So, a lens designed for a 35mm format will have a larger image circle than one designed specifically for an APS-C camera, but the focal length doesn't change.

Raylon · 10-26-2010, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by flyer

Wrong. The focal length is measured through the (apparent) optical center of the lens. APS-C, FF or medium format has nothing to do with it.

Ahh, gotcha. Learn something new everyday. I simply thought because the 35mm format had been around for so long that lenses had been measured around them. That makes much more sense.

Like I said, I knew someone else would know more and word it better

Squier · 10-26-2010, 10:47 AM

I still see thousands upon thousands of photographic websites, even reviewers, and many many ordinary amateurs repeat this stuff ad infinitum, parrot fashion, claiming they get extra reach when simply mounting a lens on a crop camera. Its become a legend that wont go away

The only way to get extra reach is with a Teleconverter, assuming we match like for like / pixel density between cameras

DCR Workshop: Digital Crop Factor Demystified

Field of View Crop Factor (Focal Length Multiplier)

DSLR Magnification

Eruditass · 10-26-2010, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by icypepsi

Hi Pentaxians,
My question is about the equivalent FoV on my K7, compared to a FF.

I have the Pentax 18-250mm (versatile, but needs an elder brother). When it reads 18mm, the FoV is equiv to about 27mm on a FF (hypothetically assuming the lens had the FoV big enough for FF), but 18mm on my K7. As for the lens on APS-C, what I see through the K7 is what I get, reading wise. But, for lenses that are made for FF, eg. when a FF lens reads 50mm, it would actually be a 75mm equiv FoV on my K7 (in other words the same FoV when my 18-250 would read as 75mm).

Here's what I don't understand. I was looking at the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 at B&H the other day paired with my K7. At 70mm it had the exact same FoV of what my 18-200mm looked when it is at 70mm. The Tamron is a FF lens. So, the Tamron at 70mm should have looked more like what my 18-250 would have when dragged to 105mm. My question is, how is the FoV the same on both when each are showing their own versions of the 70mm reading? Where am I going wrong?

Cheers..

What is the difference between focal length and crop factor? - Photography - Stack Exchange

jjdgti · 10-26-2010, 12:11 PM

Originally posted by Eruditass

What is the difference between focal length and crop factor? - Photography - Stack Exchange

They have a good explanation. thanks,

Wheatfield · 10-26-2010, 12:17 PM

Gads, I wish the crop factor junk would just go away.

OK, focal length is focal length is focal length.

If the lens is marked as a 50mm lens (for example), it is a 50mm lens no matter what format it is built for, be it APS-C, 135, 645, 6x7, 4x5 or whatever.
What changes is the physical size of the imaging device behind it and how big an area of the image circle that the lens projects is captured.

Squier · 10-26-2010, 12:31 PM

Amen

**Lowell Goudge** · 10-26-2010, 12:47 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

Gads, I wish the crop factor junk would just go away.

OK, focal length is focal length is focal length.

If the lens is marked as a 50mm lens (for example), it is a 50mm lens no matter what format it is built for, be it APS-C, 135, 645, 6x7, 4x5 or whatever.
What changes is the physical size of the imaging device behind it and how big an area of the image circle that the lens projects is captured.

but then we would have nothing to complain about.

Just think though. If pentax ever made a full frame camera people would be convertinig the ASP-C designed lenses back to full frame thinking for example the 12-24 was now an 8-16mm

Can you just imagine how screwed up that would be?

Squier · 10-26-2010, 12:54 PM

Ouch

RioRico · 10-26-2010, 01:34 PM

Here is my zillionth iteration of this illustration:

Cut a picture from a magazine. Draw a 60x45mm rectangle on it. That's ~the frame size of a 645 MF camera. Draw a 36x24mm rectangle inside that; it's the size of a 135/FF frame. Draw a 24x18mm rectangle inside that; it's ~the size of the APS-C frame of your K7. Draw a 12x18mm rectangle inside that; it's ~the size of an M4/3 or 110 frame.

Notice: THE PICTURE DIDN"T CHANGE! Resolution and DOF and perspective remain the same. Each smaller frame just sees less of the picture, that's all. This is EXACTLY as if you used one lens, the same lens, the same focal length and aperture, on 4 different cameras at the same place. The lens projects the same image circle, but smaller frames get smaller slices of it.

Forget you ever heard of "crop factor", equivalences, any of that crap. Learn what a lens does on your camera. Don't think, "Well, the best portrait FL is 85mm, and with a 1.5x crap factor that's 58mm, so I need a Helios-44M". Think, "Hmmm, I'll try a 35-105 zoom and see which FL and shooting distance I'm most comfortable with for portraits". Constantly translating crap factors will drive you nuts. Just get out there and SHOOT!

TaoMaas · 10-26-2010, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

Notice: THE PICTURE DIDN"T CHANGE! Resolution and DOF and perspective remain the same. Each smaller frame just sees less of the picture, that's all. This is EXACTLY as if you used one lens, the same lens, the same focal length and aperture, on 4 different cameras at the same place. The lens projects the same image circle, but smaller frames get smaller slices of it.

Hey...maybe it's time to go back to the old turret style of changing lenses like on old movie cameras. Except, this time, we'll pair it with a turret on the BACK of the camera so that we can rotate formats, too! That way, we can mix and match focal lengths and formats to get the FOV that we want.

Col · 10-26-2010, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

Here is my zillionth iteration of this illustration:

edit

Forget you ever heard of "crop factor", equivalences, any of that crap. Learn what a lens does on your camera. Don't think, "Well, the best portrait FL is 85mm, and with a 1.5x crap factor that's 58mm, so I need a Helios-44M". Think, "Hmmm, I'll try a 35-105 zoom and see which FL and shooting distance I'm most comfortable with for portraits". Constantly translating crap factors will drive you nuts. Just get out there and SHOOT!

CRAP factor! I think your true feelings are showing through

Though I'm in total agreement with you...

10-26-2010, 10:20 AM	#1
icypepsi Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: New Jersey Posts: 81	Equivalent FoV Hi Pentaxians, My question is about the equivalent FoV on my K7, compared to a FF. I have the Pentax 18-250mm (versatile, but needs an elder brother). When it reads 18mm, the FoV is equiv to about 27mm on a FF (hypothetically assuming the lens had the FoV big enough for FF), but 18mm on my K7. As for the lens on APS-C, what I see through the K7 is what I get, reading wise. But, for lenses that are made for FF, eg. when a FF lens reads 50mm, it would actually be a 75mm equiv FoV on my K7 (in other words the same FoV when my 18-250 would read as 75mm). Here's what I don't understand. I was looking at the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 at B&H the other day paired with my K7. At 70mm it had the exact same FoV of what my 18-200mm looked when it is at 70mm. The Tamron is a FF lens. So, the Tamron at 70mm should have looked more like what my 18-250 would have when dragged to 105mm. My question is, how is the FoV the same on both when each are showing their own versions of the 70mm reading? Where am I going wrong? Cheers..

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
645 fov	lbenac	Pentax Medium Format	5	04-26-2010 12:11 PM
fov format comparison graphic	MichaelRD	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	03-26-2010 02:31 AM
DOF and FOV calculator	MoiVous	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	05-31-2009 10:52 PM
Perspective vs. FOV	Chaoron	Pentax DSLR Discussion	34	09-29-2008 02:29 AM
Focal lengths FOV	roy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	03-08-2007 08:35 PM

10-26-2010, 10:25 AM	#2
Raylon Guest	How the lens is built makes no difference to the focal length. All lenses are measured to 35mm film standards, not FF or APS-C. So 70mm will be the same for all lenses, regardless of what they were built for. But that 70mm would be a true 70mm on a FF, not a 1.5x crop on a APS-C, which is 105mm. So basically a 50mm prime built for FF should be the same as a ~35mm prime on APS-C. But renaming all the formats would be very confusing, so everything is done to a single standard. EDIT: It's kind of hard to explain just typing it out. Hopefully someone cane put it in the right words for you.

10-26-2010, 10:33 AM	#3
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Santa Fe, NM Posts: 7,451	Originally posted by Raylon So basically a 50mm prime built for FF should be the same as a ~35mm prime on APS-C. But renaming all the formats would be very confusing, so everything is done to a single standard. You were doing well until you got to this, and then it got confusing again. I think what you MEANT to say above is: "So basically a FF 50mm prime mounted on a FF camera will have the same FOV as a ~35mm prime on an APS-C camera. But renaming all the formats would be very confusing, so everything is done to a single standard." But your basic sentiment was correct: 70mm is 70mm no matter what format the lens is intended for. It's the sensor that crops FOV, not the lens.

10-26-2010, 10:36 AM	#4
flyer Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ste-Anne des Plaines, Qc., Canada Posts: 2,013	Originally posted by Raylon H All lenses are measured to 35mm film standards, . Wrong. The focal length is measured through the (apparent) optical center of the lens. APS-C, FF or medium format has nothing to do with it. 70 mm is always 70 mm. So, a lens designed for a 35mm format will have a larger image circle than one designed specifically for an APS-C camera, but the focal length doesn't change.

10-26-2010, 10:39 AM	#5
Raylon Guest	Originally posted by flyer Wrong. The focal length is measured through the (apparent) optical center of the lens. APS-C, FF or medium format has nothing to do with it. Ahh, gotcha. Learn something new everyday. I simply thought because the 35mm format had been around for so long that lenses had been measured around them. That makes much more sense. Like I said, I knew someone else would know more and word it better

10-26-2010, 10:47 AM	#6
Squier Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Oxfordshire UK Photos: Albums Posts: 706	I still see thousands upon thousands of photographic websites, even reviewers, and many many ordinary amateurs repeat this stuff ad infinitum, parrot fashion, claiming they get extra reach when simply mounting a lens on a crop camera. Its become a legend that wont go away The only way to get extra reach is with a Teleconverter, assuming we match like for like / pixel density between cameras DCR Workshop: Digital Crop Factor Demystified Field of View Crop Factor (Focal Length Multiplier) DSLR Magnification

10-26-2010, 10:50 AM	#7
Eruditass Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,207	Originally posted by icypepsi Hi Pentaxians, My question is about the equivalent FoV on my K7, compared to a FF. I have the Pentax 18-250mm (versatile, but needs an elder brother). When it reads 18mm, the FoV is equiv to about 27mm on a FF (hypothetically assuming the lens had the FoV big enough for FF), but 18mm on my K7. As for the lens on APS-C, what I see through the K7 is what I get, reading wise. But, for lenses that are made for FF, eg. when a FF lens reads 50mm, it would actually be a 75mm equiv FoV on my K7 (in other words the same FoV when my 18-250 would read as 75mm). Here's what I don't understand. I was looking at the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 at B&H the other day paired with my K7. At 70mm it had the exact same FoV of what my 18-200mm looked when it is at 70mm. The Tamron is a FF lens. So, the Tamron at 70mm should have looked more like what my 18-250 would have when dragged to 105mm. My question is, how is the FoV the same on both when each are showing their own versions of the 70mm reading? Where am I going wrong? Cheers.. What is the difference between focal length and crop factor? - Photography - Stack Exchange

10-26-2010, 12:11 PM	#8
jjdgti Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: NJ Posts: 1,824	Originally posted by Eruditass What is the difference between focal length and crop factor? - Photography - Stack Exchange They have a good explanation. thanks,

10-26-2010, 12:17 PM	#9
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,991	Gads, I wish the crop factor junk would just go away. OK, focal length is focal length is focal length. If the lens is marked as a 50mm lens (for example), it is a 50mm lens no matter what format it is built for, be it APS-C, 135, 645, 6x7, 4x5 or whatever. What changes is the physical size of the imaging device behind it and how big an area of the image circle that the lens projects is captured.

10-26-2010, 12:31 PM	#10
Squier Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Oxfordshire UK Photos: Albums Posts: 706	Amen

10-26-2010, 12:47 PM	#11
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,892	Originally posted by Wheatfield Gads, I wish the crop factor junk would just go away. OK, focal length is focal length is focal length. If the lens is marked as a 50mm lens (for example), it is a 50mm lens no matter what format it is built for, be it APS-C, 135, 645, 6x7, 4x5 or whatever. What changes is the physical size of the imaging device behind it and how big an area of the image circle that the lens projects is captured. but then we would have nothing to complain about. Just think though. If pentax ever made a full frame camera people would be convertinig the ASP-C designed lenses back to full frame thinking for example the 12-24 was now an 8-16mm Can you just imagine how screwed up that would be?

10-26-2010, 12:54 PM	#12
Squier Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Oxfordshire UK Photos: Albums Posts: 706	Ouch

10-26-2010, 01:34 PM	#13
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Here is my zillionth iteration of this illustration: Cut a picture from a magazine. Draw a 60x45mm rectangle on it. That's ~the frame size of a 645 MF camera. Draw a 36x24mm rectangle inside that; it's the size of a 135/FF frame. Draw a 24x18mm rectangle inside that; it's ~the size of the APS-C frame of your K7. Draw a 12x18mm rectangle inside that; it's ~the size of an M4/3 or 110 frame. Notice: THE PICTURE DIDN"T CHANGE! Resolution and DOF and perspective remain the same. Each smaller frame just sees less of the picture, that's all. This is EXACTLY as if you used one lens, the same lens, the same focal length and aperture, on 4 different cameras at the same place. The lens projects the same image circle, but smaller frames get smaller slices of it. Forget you ever heard of "crop factor", equivalences, any of that crap. Learn what a lens does on your camera. Don't think, "Well, the best portrait FL is 85mm, and with a 1.5x crap factor that's 58mm, so I need a Helios-44M". Think, "Hmmm, I'll try a 35-105 zoom and see which FL and shooting distance I'm most comfortable with for portraits". Constantly translating crap factors will drive you nuts. Just get out there and SHOOT!

10-26-2010, 01:50 PM	#14
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	Originally posted by RioRico Notice: THE PICTURE DIDN"T CHANGE! Resolution and DOF and perspective remain the same. Each smaller frame just sees less of the picture, that's all. This is EXACTLY as if you used one lens, the same lens, the same focal length and aperture, on 4 different cameras at the same place. The lens projects the same image circle, but smaller frames get smaller slices of it. Hey...maybe it's time to go back to the old turret style of changing lenses like on old movie cameras. Except, this time, we'll pair it with a turret on the BACK of the camera so that we can rotate formats, too! That way, we can mix and match focal lengths and formats to get the FOV that we want.

10-26-2010, 02:20 PM	#15
Col Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Stansted Essex Photos: Gallery Posts: 614	Originally posted by RioRico Here is my zillionth iteration of this illustration: edit Forget you ever heard of "crop factor", equivalences, any of that crap. Learn what a lens does on your camera. Don't think, "Well, the best portrait FL is 85mm, and with a 1.5x crap factor that's 58mm, so I need a Helios-44M". Think, "Hmmm, I'll try a 35-105 zoom and see which FL and shooting distance I'm most comfortable with for portraits". Constantly translating crap factors will drive you nuts. Just get out there and SHOOT! CRAP factor! I think your true feelings are showing through Though I'm in total agreement with you...

Equivalent FoV

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!