Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

My posts · My subscriptions
  

  Previous versions of RustyBug's message #10257650 « Oly 24/2.8 vs. Canon 24L TS-E II »

  

RustyBug
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
N/A


wickerprints wrote:

No, no, no. This is a categorically incorrect interpretation of focal length.

I never said anything about focal length being longer...
I know you think I'm whack, but please give me a little credit for not being a total moron.

The oly is physically 31mm long, the TSE is physically 107mm long ... that's physically 76mm longer, which yields a different working distance when the film plane/camera position remains constant.

I've assumed nothing. I've simply done exactly as I stated ... i.e. shot two different lenses from the same shooting position and recorded the results ... nothing less, nothing more. Upon realizing that the PHYSICAL length of the two lenses is different enough that it impacts the perspective, I've indicated a re-shoot is warranted.

The question was asked why it showed two different position/perspectives. The answer is simply that one lens is three inches longer than the other and thereby, while shot from the exact same film plane/camera position, the working distances are different and have yielded a different perspective.

Would you prefer I equalize the AOV or the working distance for the re-shoot?
I realize that no matter what I do you're going to criticize the integrity of it, so I'm wondering why I should even bother.



Jan 18, 2012 at 02:41 PM
RustyBug
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
N/A


N/A


Jan 18, 2012 at 06:12 AM
RustyBug
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
Oly 24/2.8 vs. Canon 24L TS-E II


wickerprints wrote:

No, no, no. This is a categorically incorrect interpretation of focal length.


I never said anything about focal length being longer...
I know you think I'm whack, but please give me a little credit for not being a total moron.

The oly is physically 31mm long, the TSE is physically 107mm long ... that's physically 76mm longer, which yields a different working distance when the film plane/camera position remains constant.

I've assumed nothing. I've simply done exactly as I stated ... i.e. shot two different lenses from the same shooting position and recorded the results ... nothing less, nothing more. Upon realizing that the PHYSICAL length of the two lenses is different enough that it impacts the perspective, I've indicated a re-shoot is warranted.

The question was asked why it showed two different position/perspectives. The answer is simply that one lens is three inches longer than the other and thereby, while shot from the exact same film plane/camera position, the working distances are different and have yielded a different perspective.

Would you prefer I equalize the AOV or the working distance for the re-shoot?
I realize that no matter what I do you're going to criticize the integrity of it, so I'm wondering why I should even bother.



Jan 18, 2012 at 04:27 AM



  Previous versions of RustyBug's message #10257650 « Oly 24/2.8 vs. Canon 24L TS-E II »