I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ... then without changing the height of the enlarger (Focal Length, if you will) replacing the 8x10 sheet of paper with a 4x5 sheet of paper. The physical properties of the light being PROJECTED from the enlarger has NOT CHANGED in any way ... only a smaller capture portion of the projection would be captured on the paper and the image would have been cropped, i.e. crop factor.
In this way the resolution is still the same, the perspective is the same, the contrast is the same, etc. The angle of projection remains the exact same, but if we consider the angle from the enlarger to the edge of the smaller paper (capture area), it is different since we didn\'t take advantage of the full projection area. This is akin to the angle of view, but the properties of the projection (FL) remain UNCHANGED.
If one HAD lowered the enlarging lens to cover ONLY the area of the 4x5 to project an image the same as the 8x10, it would have been at a different height (i.e. FL) to project the full image on the smaller paper (capture area). In doing so, the resulting print would have had a different resolution & contrast because now we have changed the physical properties of the light concentrating the light to the smaller paper (capture area). In this manner, a lens DESIGNED with an image circle for for the smaller sensor (capture area) will yield a different optical properties (resolution, contrast, DOF, etc.) than one DESIGNED for the larger image circle, even if the FL is the same.
Using glass with an image circle sufficient for MF area of capture, but only capturing it on the smaller sensor size, yields no change in the optical projection properties of that lens. Putting MF on FF, 1.25, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 (crop factors) is the same as leaving the enlarging lens set at a height sufficient to cover the 8x10 and simply using smaller pieces of paper ... no changes in the projection, only the area of capture. Conversely, using a lens of the same FL designed for the smaller crop image circle will give different optical properties (i.e. contrast,DOF), similar to lowering the enlarger to cover only the 4x5 sheet of paper.
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ... then without changing the height of the enlarger (Focal Length, if you will) replacing the 8x10 sheet of paper with a 4x5 sheet of paper. The physical properties of the light being PROJECTED from the enlarger has NOT CHANGED in any way ... only a smaller capture portion of the projection would be captured on the paper and the image would have been cropped, i.e. crop factor.
In this way the resolution is still the same, the perspective is the same, the contrast is the same, etc. The angle of projection remains the exact same, but if we consider the angle from the enlarger to the edge of the smaller paper (capture area), it is different since we didn\'t take advantage of the full projection area. This is akin to the angle of view, but the properties of the projection (FL) remain UNCHANGED.
If one HAD lowered the enlarging lens to cover ONLY the area of the 4x5 to project an image the same as the 8x10, it would have been at a different height (i.e. FL) to project the full image on the smaller paper (capture area). In doing so, the resulting print would have had a different resolution & contrast because now we have changed the physical properties of the light concentrating the light to the smaller paper (capture area). In this manner, a lens DESIGNED with an image circle for for the smaller sensor (capture area) will yield a different optical properties (resolution, contrast, DOF, etc.) than one DESIGNED for the larger image circle, even if the FL is the same.
Using glass with an image circle sufficient for MF area of capture, but only capturing it on the smaller sensor size, yields no change in the optical projection properties of that lens. Putting MF on FF, 1.25, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 (crop factors) is the same as leaving the enlarging lens set at a height sufficient to cover the 8x10 and simply using smaller pieces of paper ... no changes in the projection, only the area of capture. Conversely, using a lens of the same FL designed for the smaller crop image circle will give different optical properties (i.e. contrast,DOF), similar to lowering the enlarger to cover only the 4x5 sheet of paper.
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ... then without changing the height of the enlarger (Focal Length, if you will) replacing the 8x10 sheet of paper with a 4x5 sheet of paper. The physical properties of the light being PROJECTED from the enlarger has NOT CHANGED in any way ... only a smaller capture portion of the projection would be captured on the paper and the image would have been cropped, i.e. crop factor.
In this way the resolution is still the same, the perspective is the same, the contrast is the same, etc. The angle of projection remains the exact same, but if we consider the angle from the enlarger to the edge of the smaller paper (capture area), it is different since we didn\'t take advantage of the full projection area. This is akin to the angle of view, but the properties of the projection (FL) remain UNCHANGED.
If one HAD lowered the enlarging lens to cover ONLY the area of the 4x5 to project an image the same as the 8x10, it would have been at a different height (i.e. FL) to project the full image on the smaller paper (capture area). In doing so, the resulting print would have had a different resolution & contrast because now we have changed the physical properties of the light concentrating the light to the smaller paper (capture area). In this manner, a lens DESIGNED with an image circle for for the smaller sensor (capture area) will yield a different optical properties (resolution, contrast, DOF, etc.) than one DESIGNED for the larger image circle, even if the FL is the same.
Using glass with an image circle sufficient for MF area of capture, but only capturing it on the smaller sensor size, yields no change in the optical projection properties of that lens. Putting MF on FF, 1.25, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 (crop factors) is the same as leaving the enlarging lens set at a height sufficient to cover the 8x10 and simply using smaller pieces of paper ... no changes in the projection, only the area of capture. Using a lens of the same FL designed for the smaller crop image circle will give different optical properties (i.e. contrast,DOF), similar to lowering the enlarger to cover only the 4x5 sheet of paper.
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ... then without changing the height of the enlarger (Focal Length, if you will) replacing the 8x10 sheet of paper with a 4x5 sheet of paper. The physical properties of the light being PROJECTED from the enlarger has NOT CHANGED in any way ... only a smaller capture portion of the projection would be captured on the paper and the image would have been cropped, i.e. crop factor.
In this way the resolution is still the same, the perspective is the same, the contrast is the same, etc. The angle of projection remains the exact same, but if we consider the angle from the enlarger to the edge of the smaller paper (capture area), it is different since we didn\'t take advantage of the full projection area. This is akin to the angle of view, but the properties of the projection (FL) remain UNCHANGED.
If one HAD lowered the enlarging lens to cover ONLY the area of the 4x5 to project an image the same as the 8x10, it would have been at a different height (i.e. FL) to project the full image on the smaller paper (capture area). In doing so, the resulting print would have had a different resolution & contrast because now we have changed the physical properties of the light concentrating the light to the smaller paper (capture area). In this manner, a lens DESIGNED with an image circle for for the smaller sensor (capture area) will yield a different optical properties (resolution, contrast, DOF, etc.) than one DESIGNED for the larger image circle, even if the FL is the same.
Using glass with an image circle sufficient for MF area of capture, but only capturing it on the smaller sensor size, yields no change in the optical properties. Putting MF on FF, 1.25, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 (crop factors) is the same as leaving the enlarging lens set at a height sufficient to cover the 8x10 and simply using smaller pieces of paper ... no changes in the projection, only the area of capture. Using a lens of the same FL designed for the smaller crop image circle will give different optical properties (i.e. contrast,DOF), similar to lowering the enlarger to cover only the 4x5 sheet of paper.
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ... then without changing the height of the enlarger (Focal Length, if you will) replacing the 8x10 sheet of paper with a 4x5 sheet of paper. The physical properties of the light being PROJECTED from the enlarger has NOT CHANGED in any way ... only a smaller capture portion of the projection would be captured on the paper and the image would have been cropped, i.e. crop factor.
In this way the resolution is still the same, the perspective is the same, the contrast is the same, etc. The angle of projection remains the exact same, but if we consider the angle from the enlarger to the edge of the smaller paper (capture area), it is different since we didn\'t take advantage of the full projection area. This is akin to the angle of view, but the properties of the projection (FL) remain UNCHANGED.
If one HAD lowered the enlarging lens to cover ONLY the area of the 4x5 to project an image the same as the 8x10, it would have been at a different height (i.e. FL) to project the full image on the smaller paper (capture area). In doing so, the resulting print would have had a different resolution & contrast because now we have changed the physical properties of the light concentrating the light to the smaller paper (capture area). In this manner, a lens DESIGNED with an image circle for for the smaller sensor (capture area) will yield a different optical properties (resolution, contrast, DOF, etc.) than one DESIGNED for the larger image circle, even if the FL is the same.
Using glass with in image circle sufficient for MF area of capture, but only capturing it on the smaller sensor size, yields no change in the optical properties. Putting MF on FF, 1.25, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 (crop factors) is the same as leaving the enlarging lens set at a height sufficient to cover the 8x10 and simply using smaller pieces of paper ... no changes in the projection, only the area of capture. Using a lens of the same FL designed for the smaller crop image circle will give different optical properties (i.e. contrast,DOF), similar to lowering the enlarger to cover only the 4x5 sheet of paper.
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ... then without changing the height of the enlarger (Focal Length, if you will) replacing the 8x10 sheet of paper with a 4x5 sheet of paper. The physical properties of the light being PROJECTED from the enlarger has NOT CHANGED in any way ... only a smaller capture portion of the projection would be captured on the paper and the image would have been cropped, i.e. crop factor.
In this way the resolution is still the same, the perspective is the same, the contrast is the same, etc. The angle of projection remains the exact same, but if we consider the angle from the lens to the edge of the smaller paper (capture area), it is different since we didn\'t take advantage of the full projection area. This is akin to the angle of view, but the properties of the projection (FL) remain UNCHANGED.
If one HAD lowered the enlarging lens to cover ONLY the area of the 4x5 to project an image the same as the 8x10, it would have been at a different height (i.e. FL) to project the full image on the smaller paper (capture area). In doing so, the resulting print would have had a different resolution & contrast because now we have changed the physical properties of the light concentrating the light to the smaller paper (capture area). In this manner, a lens DESIGNED with an image circle for for the smaller sensor (capture area) will yield a different optical properties (resolution, contrast, DOF, etc.) than one DESIGNED for the larger image circle, even if the FL is the same.
Using glass with in image circle sufficient for MF area of capture, but only capturing it on the smaller sensor size, yields no change in the optical properties. Putting MF on FF, 1.25, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 (crop factors) is the same as leaving the enlarging lens set at a height sufficient to cover the 8x10 and simply using smaller pieces of paper ... no changes in the projection, only the area of capture. Using a lens of the same FL designed for the smaller crop image circle will give different optical properties (i.e. contrast,DOF), similar to lowering the enlarger to cover only the 4x5 sheet of paper.
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ... then without changing the height of the enlarger (Focal Length, if you will) replacing the 8x10 sheet of paper with a 4x5 sheet of paper. The physical properties of the light being PROJECTED from the lens has NOT CHANGED in any way ... only a smaller capture portion of the projection would be captured on the paper and the image would have been cropped, i.e. crop factor.
In this way the resolution is still the same, the perspective is the same, the contrast is the same, etc. The angle of projection remains the exact same, but if we consider the angle from the lens to the edge of the smaller paper (capture area), it is different since we didn\'t take advantage of the full projection area. This is akin to the angle of view, but the properties of the projection (FL) remain UNCHANGED.
If one HAD lowered the enlarging lens to cover ONLY the area of the 4x5 to project an image the same as the 8x10, it would have been at a different height (i.e. FL) to project the full image on the smaller paper (capture area). In doing so, the resulting print would have had a different resolution & contrast because now we have changed the physical properties of the light concentrating the light to the smaller paper (capture area). In this manner, a lens DESIGNED with an image circle for for the smaller sensor (capture area) will yield a different optical properties (resolution, contrast, DOF, etc.) than one DESIGNED for the larger image circle, even if the FL is the same.
Using glass with in image circle sufficient for MF area of capture, but only capturing it on the smaller sensor size, yields no change in the optical properties. Putting MF on FF, 1.25, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 (crop factors) is the same as leaving the enlarging lens set at a height sufficient to cover the 8x10 and simply using smaller pieces of paper ... no changes in the projection, only the area of capture. Using a lens of the same FL designed for the smaller crop image circle will give different optical properties (i.e. contrast,DOF), similar to lowering the enlarger to cover only the 4x5 sheet of paper.
I opt for crop ... I think of it akin to having a darkroom enlarger set at a height to project an image large enough for an 8x10 print ... then without changing the height of the enlarger (Focal Length, if you will) replacing the 8x10 sheet of paper with a 4x5 sheet of paper. The physical properties of the light being PROJECTED from the lens has NOT CHANGED in any way ... only a smaller capture portion of the projection would be captured on the paper and the image would have been cropped, i.e. crop factor.
In this way the resolution is still the same, the perspective is the same, the contrast is the same, etc. The angle of projection remains the exact same, but if we consider the angle from the lens to the edge of the smaller paper (capture area), it is different since we didn\'t take advantage of the full projection area. This is akin to the angle of view, but the properties of the projection (FL) remain UNCHANGED.
If one HAD lowered the enlarging lens to cover ONLY the area of the 4x5 to project an image the same as the 8x10, it would have been at a different height (i.e. FL) to project the full image on the smaller paper (capture area). In doing so, the resulting print would have had a different resolution & contrast because now we have changed the physical properties of the light concentrating the light to the smaller paper (capture area). In this manner, a lens DESIGNED with an image circle for for the smaller sensor (capture area) will yield a different optical properties (resolution, contrast, DOF, etc.) than one DESIGNED for the larger image circle, even if the FL is the same.
Using glass with in image circle sufficient for MF area of capture, but only capturing it on the smaller sensor size, yields no change in the optical properties. Putting MF on FF, 1.25, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 (crop factors) is the same as leaving the enlarging lens set at a height sufficient to cover the 8x10 and simply using smaller peices of paper ... no changes in the projection, only the area of capture. Using a lens of the same FL designed for the smaller crop image circle will give different optical properties (i.e. contrast), similar to lowering the enlarger to cover only the 4x5 sheet of paper.
Hope this helps.
May 20, 2010 at 09:41 AM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #8489656 « Mamiya(MF) on Digital Thread »
