Check out Wedding Photography section of our forum.
FX Vs DX lens
Apr 20, 2012 22:55:36 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
ward5311 wrote:
Sometimes people shouldn't post because they do not understand the details.Sometimes people don't understand things that are said because they don't understand or wallow in the details.
And some could do with a good dose of humility..Whatever dude..Geez
Apr 21, 2012 08:26:18 #
wgold13 wrote:
I would appreciate an explanation of the following... (show quote)
Hey people, a picture is worth a thousand word. Nikon has a lens simulator where you can select a lens focal length, select either a FX or a DX lens, a FX or a DX body and see what the effect is. It answered many of my questions.
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/simulator/
To determine if a lens is a DX or FX lens I use
http://www.neocamera.com/list_lenses.php
Just my two cents. :)
Apr 21, 2012 18:55:45 #
Another thing about FX lenses on a DX camera: improved performance. When you use only the central portion of the image circle of a lens, you are also "focusing in" on the best performance the lens has to offer. Lens design always features decreasing performance toward the edges of the image area. It can be a little or a lot, but the crop factor of an FX lens on a DX body crops out the decreasing performance, to a degree.
Check out Advice from the Pros section of our forum.
Apr 21, 2012 19:06:23 #
shopnascar
Loc: San Luis Obispo, CA
Nikonian72 wrote:
ward5311 wrote:
Sometimes people shouldn't post because they do not understand the details.Sometimes people don't understand things that are said because they don't understand or wallow in the details.
Perhaps if some people were a little less arrogant and condescending, a good discussion could be enjoyed by even the non-op. what a concept! Perhaps we should add free speech to the constitution.
Apr 21, 2012 19:44:16 #
Wabbit
Loc: Arizona Desert
shopnascar wrote:
Perhaps if some people were a little less arrogant and condescending, a good discussion could be enjoyed by even the non-op. what a concept! Perhaps we should add free speech to the constitution.
Nikonian72 wrote:
ward5311 wrote:
Sometimes people shouldn't post because they do not understand the details.Sometimes people don't understand things that are said because they don't understand or wallow in the details.
Perhaps if some people were a little less arrogant and condescending, a good discussion could be enjoyed by even the non-op. what a concept! Perhaps we should add free speech to the constitution.
Hey Doc .... well said ...... there could be much more participation, and we know why there isn't.
Apr 21, 2012 20:23:23 #
Based on past experience, I'm sure Nikonian72 didn't mean to be condescending. Can we move past this now? Please!
Apr 22, 2012 01:11:53 #
Apr 22, 2012 01:31:27 #
I think the easiest way to understand it is that to make say a 4 x 6 photo, the image on a CMOS sensor must be magnified 1.5 times more than the image on a full frame sensor would.
Another thing that must be taken into consideration is that the field of view on a CMOS sensor will be from the center of the lens. As a result, the field of view will be narrower and give the perspective of a focal length 1.5 times as long.
Another thing that must be taken into consideration is that the field of view on a CMOS sensor will be from the center of the lens. As a result, the field of view will be narrower and give the perspective of a focal length 1.5 times as long.
Apr 22, 2012 20:38:57 #
wgold13 wrote:
I would appreciate an explanation of the following... (show quote)
wgold 13,
It has been two days since you asked your question, so you may not even see this response, but I'm not sure anyone actually answered your question. Sorry, but some of the guys were having a little pis*ing contest. I don't think we have a "good" answer to your question, because the camera manufacturers (and lens manufacturers) seem to favor the "full framers," when it comes to marking lenses. I use Canons, so instead of FX vs DX, it's EF vs EF-S. Even though the EF-S lenses won't even work on a "full frame" Canon, they are still marked with 35mm numbers. I'm not really sure why. I've just gotten used to doing the conversion in my head, so it's just irritating, not a really serious problem.
Apr 22, 2012 22:48:11 #
[quote=ThomasS]
It is because a lens is what a lens IS. The size of the sensor does not have a THING to do with it. A 135mm lens is a 135 on 35mm, EF, DX, FX, medium format, an 8x10 view camera. Whatever. Why would it be something else?
When 35mm was developed back in the early part of the last century, I seriously doubt view camera photographers thought that lens length on 35mm should be stated in terms of 8x10 film cameras.
wgold13 wrote:
I would appreciate an explanation of the following: When I use Canons, so instead of FX vs DX, it's EF vs EF-S. Even though the EF-S lenses won't even work on a "full frame" Canon, they are still marked with 35mm numbers. I'm not really sure why. I've just gotten used to doing the conversion in my head, so it's just irritating, not a really serious problem.
It is because a lens is what a lens IS. The size of the sensor does not have a THING to do with it. A 135mm lens is a 135 on 35mm, EF, DX, FX, medium format, an 8x10 view camera. Whatever. Why would it be something else?
When 35mm was developed back in the early part of the last century, I seriously doubt view camera photographers thought that lens length on 35mm should be stated in terms of 8x10 film cameras.
Apr 22, 2012 23:44:30 #
And merely to add to what CaptainC said, a lens is labeled based on its focal length. That is the distance from the focal lens to the focal plane of the camera. If you look on your camera you'll see a circle with a line through it. That is your focal plane. That measurement never changes despite how a smaller sensor may alter the image.
Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.
Apr 23, 2012 20:29:49 #
Thanks guys, I get the message. As a long time 35mm user, I never thought about this issue until I switched to digital. Then I had to start multiplying everything by 1.6, since I bought a 50D and not a 5D. It's probably a good brain exercise anyway! HA!
Apr 23, 2012 23:18:21 #
ThomasS wrote:
quote=wgold13 I would appreciate an explanation o... (show quote)
Thanks for actually answering the question that was asked wgold 13. A lot of pat answers were trotted out assuming the same old question was asked. It wasn't and the answers given were not relevant to the question asked. They may have been FAQ answers, but this wasn't an FAQ. Don't rag on posters for their question when you're superior photography knowledge is incapable of understanding a straight forward question. I'm done with the UHH photography forum. Tired of the same old discussions (e.g., PP is not photography, blah, blah, blah). Guess I'll stick to the photo galleries. The discussion forum is tedious. The experts in this topic owe the poster an apology!
Apr 24, 2012 04:54:19 #
mjp wrote:
quote=ThomasS quote=wgold13 I would appreciate a... (show quote)
That's just it. You wouldn't get the perspective of a 75mm lens when puttig a DX 55mm lens on a DX body. I don't know where that came from, the last draw of the night?
Apr 24, 2012 23:05:50 #
SteveR wrote:
quote=mjp quote=ThomasS quote=wgold13 I would a... (show quote)
Ignoring the fact that prespective was the wrong term and should have been field of view, the primary question, as I read it is "why doesn't a 50mm DX lens on a DX body give you the same field of view as a 50mm FX lens on an FX body."
I had the same question when buying the 35mm DX lens from Nikon.
The Nikon calculator mentioned above shows that a 50mm DX on a DX body has an equivalent angle of view to a 76.5mm FX lens on an FX body.
This discussion just reminded me of the Unix forums in the 80's -- telling people to search for the answer (it took hours to find the right answer in those days and still does when you hit threads like this), ragging on newbies (which is usually less of a problem here), etc. when a simple answer to the question asked would have saved everyone from a lot of wasted time. All of which is why I don't ask questions on forums and love Google.
Back to Lightroom in my office. Only started reading photo forums so I could be with my wife in the family room on a netbook and still get my photography fix.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Software and Computer Support for Photographers section of our forum.