RDH

Nothing, that is exactly right. The confusion is not yours, the confusion is between a crop sensor and cropping in PP. They are not the same, but some people on the list don't understand that.

RolandComfort Loc: Saint Louis

I think it comes down to the "look" of a 35mm or a 50mm as we have come to know in film and still shooting during the past 50 years. My thing is filmmaking. I got into the 7D a few years ago when the Indie film world jumped on the HDSLR bandwagon. I grew up using a 35mm camera as a kid, dark room and all, but drifted away to video using cameras like the Canon XL1s (porno camera) that had great image stabilization, auto focus, and auto everything else. Using the new HDSLR, I quickly figured out that I would have to learn 35mm lenses and bodies all over again. Actually, in retrospect, 40 years of casual shooting 35mm cameras didn't prepare me for using a still camera for video. Suddenly, shutter has to be locked at 50 (24fps) or 60 (30fps), auto focus doesn't work any more, and open f/stops give you a depth of field of about 1 inch which doesn't work well if your charachter decides to lean back in his chair. Now DOF and hyperfocal settings come into play. But, back to cropped sensors, the big problem for movie making is you can't get a real 50mm natural shot or a 35mm wide shot because you have to use wider lenses to net out. DOF and lens distortion is different. That said, I love my 7D and I guess I'll have to live with the disparity. I envy you still shooters with your Tv and Av and Auto whatever. HDSLR shooters for moviemaking are stuck with manual in every setting. Gotta say though, still shooting has taught me more in 3 years than I learned in 10 years of shooting video. Go, go UHH! You guys are great. I learn something every day that I check in and try to shut up and just listen.

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

I've read through all 5 of the pages and posts for this thread, and nobody said anything about that dog. Plus, you guys have worked the OP post to death. Now, why don't you all start talking about cell phone camera lenses. How much are those photos cropped, or are they full frame? Why don't Canon make a cell phone lens? Imagine a cell phone lens 100-400mm. OOPs can't have a push pull lens, to much dust on the cell phone. It sure would be nice to have a little wiener dog carry my ammo, and a couple lenses.

jgordon Loc: Boulder CO

Maybe the most interesting aspect of this discussion is why it has gone on so long. Clearly, it has touched some nerves -- but what are they?

Part of what is going on is just a common element of many debates. At some point, the need of participants to prove that they are correct (and more correct than others) often seems to take on more importance than the substantive issues being discussed. But I think more than that is going on here, and the comment about cell phones may get near the heart of the agitation.

I don't believe that camera manufacturers were trying to be dishonest when they talked about lens "equivalencies." I think they were trying to prepare old guys like me (with a background in 35 mm film photography) for what we would see when we looked through the view finders of less than full frame digital cameras. In a limited sense, the tactic worked for me because it gave me at least some idea of how an image would be framed on the new kind of camera.

However, I think what is really going on in this surprisingly long discussion is something more profound than the use of transitional terms. We are dealing with change, and that can be distressing.

Most images are no longer taken with dedicated cameras, but rather with phones. Most images are no longer viewed hanging on walls but, instead on computer screens where differences in resolution are less critical. Camera manufacturers are coming out with new models and new concepts all the time and are generally floundering and experimenting as they try to figure out what the new markets want and need.

This atmosphere of constant change is disorientating to many. So, we look for "equivalencies" or landmarks in an effort to orient ourselves (with reference to the old more familiar realities) as we struggle to get our bearings in a confusing transitional period. Actually, the word "similarities" might be more accurate in this context than "equivalencies" because the new world is clearly different from the old one.

Part of adjusting to the new realities is trying to figure out terminology that works for us. I think we struggling with that process and the struggle has fueled the energy generated by this topic.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Great post, JGordon!
Well said.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

So the yellow rectangle below is “seeing” less of the image than the full-frame red rectangle. The image itself hasn’t changed, but the angle-of-view in the smaller sensor has, so it appears as though the image in the yellow frame is closer, which makes it seem like the focal length is larger…neither of which is true. - See more at:
http://www.garydatesphotos.com/2010/full-frame-lens-on-cropped-sensor/#sthash.Poh6CaFY.dpuf

Note: The circle is the image projected by the lens onto the sensor.

In other words, the FX and DX cameras see the very same image, at the very same size.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

I think you have it backwards.
The person was carrying the camera for the dog.
You obviously don't have a dachshund. :wink:

RDH

Sounds to me like a Boarder Collie. Sure you don't have a Boarder impersonating Dachshund?

Jersey guy Loc: New Joisey

Jgordon! Ditto, here! Well written and thought out.

photo169 Loc: Chicago,ILL

You still don't get it !!!!!!!! :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: A 300mm lens will bring you closer than a 200mm lens,screw the pixels,they have nothing to do with it. View has nothing to do with magnification. 300mm will bring you closer than a 200mm. Plain and simple why can't you disbelievers soak this in ????????? :hunf: :hunf: :hunf:

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I think that the circle that I posted above explains it. A 200mm lens will always be a 200mm lens.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

He is very good at impersonations, so you might have something there.
He's above this "crop factor" crap, so you won't see him posting here, but his advice is to look through your camera and shoot what you see. End of story!

Wabbit Loc: Arizona Desert

Yes it does Doc ..... for all intents and purposes you've got a 150mm piece of glass ..... this has been beat to death more times than I can count ..... wabbits only have 6 toes ..... anyway what's your point ?

SteveR Loc: Michigan

How, Wabbit? Look at the circle that I posted. I sees the same image as the fx camera.

photo169 Loc: Chicago,ILL

No for all intents and purposes you have a 100mm piece of glass. A 100mm is a 100mm and a 150mm is a 150mm. THE X FACTOR DOES NOT CHANGE YOUR FOCAL LENGTH. Got it doc

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: