Victor S wrote:
Daan, I think you misunderstand the use of wideangle here. I used to have the same wrong idea about the wideangle use... Anyways, long story short, if you used other FL under those conditions you wouldn\'t have the same amount of clouds and sky in the background. It\'s not about fitting the couple in the frame, it\'s about how much background you can fit while still having the couple the size you want.
I hope it makes sense!
What I meant... If I shoot a subject with BG at 24mm... and zoom in to 35mm and back off a little, I get the exact same framing (with subject and BG equally sized). The reverse is also true. So, if that shot was done at 14mm, and I would have room to manouvre backwards, I could use the 24mm FL to get the exact same framing (with subject and BG equally sized). Hope this makes sense too
I realize that when the differences between FL\'s become more extreme, this will have a more pronounced effect on how much of the BG will appear in the frame... In other words: the differences will be greater.
Victor S wrote:
Daan, I think you misunderstand the use of wideangle here. I used to have the same wrong idea about the wideangle use... Anyways, long story short, if you used other FL under those conditions you wouldn\'t have the same amount of clouds and sky in the background. It\'s not about fitting the couple in the frame, it\'s about how much background you can fit while still having the couple the size you want.
I hope it makes sense!
What I meant... If I shoot a subject with BG at 24mm... and zoom in to 35mm and back off a little, I get the exact same framing (with subject and BG equally sized). The reverse is also true. So, if that shot was done at 14mm, and I would have room to manouvre backwards, I could use the 24mm FL to get the exact same framing (with subject and BG equally sized). Hope this makes sense too
