Originally posted by Tanzer This also means that the definition of normal has meaning only in the context of the final presentation size, i.e., the printed/displayed image size, and your viewing distance. So as we get larger monitors and large screen TVs which fill a whole wall, maybe wider angle lenses will become the new normal.
No, you're missing something.
Although perspective is controlled solely by the position of the camera in relation to the subject, that's not the end of the story, because in practice, field of view plays an important role.
Consider you are standing on the south rim of the Grand Canyon with a tripod, a camera and three lenses: an ultra wide, a normal, and a super telephoto. You set up the tripod and mount the camera to prove to yourself once and for all that perspective is controlled by camera position. You attach the ultra wide and take a shot, then you attach the normal lens and take a shot, and finally the super telephoto and take a shot. You get all three images home, stack them up in photoshop, and sure enough, the perspective is exactly the same in all three images. But there is a problem. The normal, and particularly the tele don't really convey the expanse of the place, only the ultra wide really lets you see the canyon when you get home. So for a given subject, the focal length, and the image format will determine the practical working distance.
Now, is there a way to photograph the Grand Canyon with a normal, or a telephoto lens and still get the whole thing in the shot? Sure there is, just stand further back, I mean WAY back, 20 miles or so should do it. Oops, but now you've moved the camera, so the perspective has changed. See? There's no winning, we might as well all give up photography right now, and become writers.