Why was the 50 mm lens so common as a standard lens ?
Dec 17, 2017 10:15:18 #
I see it all the time here on UHH, people stating that 50 mm lens is the standard lens because it "sees" almost what the human eye sees. And this is not only here on UHH but in endless comments and articles on the internet.
I am not saying this is wrong but I am not beliving it either because the 50 mm is not at all close to what the human eye sees. A compromise between a portrait lens, landscape lens and lens manufacturing cost for a fast lens is more likely to be the reason. It would be interesting to get the true answer to this.
Anyone here that knows the truth about why the 50 (or close to 50) mm lens became the standard lens??
I am not saying this is wrong but I am not beliving it either because the 50 mm is not at all close to what the human eye sees. A compromise between a portrait lens, landscape lens and lens manufacturing cost for a fast lens is more likely to be the reason. It would be interesting to get the true answer to this.
Anyone here that knows the truth about why the 50 (or close to 50) mm lens became the standard lens??
Dec 17, 2017 10:23:46 #
I was thought that 50mm roughly equaled the diagonal of a 35 mm negative.
Dec 17, 2017 10:25:16 #
My understanding is that it presents an undistorted field of view of what our eyes see without peripheral vision.
Dec 17, 2017 10:28:09 #
Care to elaborate the basis of your thinking in this statement?
I am not beliving it either because the 50 mm is not at all close to what the human eye sees
I am not beliving it either because the 50 mm is not at all close to what the human eye sees
Dec 17, 2017 10:31:44 #
JPL wrote:
I see it all the time here on UHH, people stating ... (show quote)
Back in the days of 35mm film, 50mm lenses were also called Normal Lenses. I thought that was because 50mm most closely matched the the normal view of the human eye.
Dec 17, 2017 10:32:21 #
Dec 17, 2017 10:33:45 #
PhotoKurtz wrote:
I recall reading that the human eye lens is about 70m?
Of course, that was about 40 years ago when I was studying photog... who knows what has happened to modern eyes... :)
Dec 17, 2017 10:34:44 #
Wanderer2
Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains
I don't know the "why" of why 50mm became thought of as the standard lens. But I do know it goes back a long, long time. This was widely said and believed when I started in photography back in the 1960s.
Dec 17, 2017 10:35:10 #
lesdmd wrote:
My understanding is that it presents an undistorted field of view of what our eyes see without peripheral vision.
Yes. Something 20 feet away will look like 20 feet away in the picture.
Dec 17, 2017 10:38:21 #
aaciolkowski wrote:
I was thought that 50mm roughly equaled the diagonal of a 35 mm negative.
Yes, about 43mm actually.
Dec 17, 2017 10:38:29 #
JPL wrote:
I see it all the time here on UHH, people stating ... (show quote)
Hold a seance and ask Oskar Barnak?
Dec 17, 2017 10:39:45 #
50mm is the aproximate angle of view of human vision. While every bodies vision is different 50mm was a compromise.
Dec 17, 2017 10:40:22 #
It’s about depth perspective. At the diagonal dimension of a given image format, there is no foreshortening or exaggeration of the relative position of objects in the field of view. On full frame and 35mm (both about 36x24mm), the diagonal is about 43 mm. In the market place, normal lenses are in the range of 45 to 55mm. By 35mm, there’s noticeable edge of frame widening of objects. By 60mm, there’s a tad of foreshortening.
Dec 17, 2017 10:45:33 #
I do not believe that camera and lens makers where thinking much about human eye vision when they started making those lenses decades ago. Must have been other reasons for this focal length becoming so popular ;)
Dec 17, 2017 10:57:36 #
Not sure this really answers the question, but it is a fascinating read: https://petapixel.com/2012/11/17/the-camera-versus-the-human-eye/
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.