Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

It's not even as complicated as almost everyone here is making it. The only thing that you need to do is to identify the approximate focal length of a "normal" lens on your camera. 50mm for full frame. 35mm for DX. Whatever for your camera, if different. Any lens longer than that is telephoto, any shorter is wide angle. That's it. Nothing else needed.

As you gain more experience, you might want to remember that less than about half of "normal" is the threshold for extreme wide angle, the point where inherent distortion becomes prevalent. And you might want to eventually remember that somewhere around 1.5-2X "normal" focal length is optimum for portraiture...if you do serious portrait photography.

A good rule of thumb to remember also is that magnification (reduction of apparent distance) is simply the ratio of the actual focal length to "normal" focal length. Absolutely no need to fret over equivalence or over angle of view, or anything else.

I'd argue that keeping track of angle of view is as big a waste of time and energy as always converting to the equivalent full frame focal length. Who in the world can make any sense of a 10 degree angle of view? And is it horizontal, vertical, or diagonal?

Abo

Me.

And intuitively, angle of view is applied to the largest dimension of the frame...
diagonally not withstanding.

You can imagine 90 degrees easily??? 10 degrees is one ninth of that... couldn't be easier...
except for you, it seems, Larry. lol

Just for the record, I'm happy with "focal length". I've been shooting SLR (and other types)
cameras since the 70s, so a lenses focal length is a benchmark that I'm used to.

Apart from that; if logic and reason are to prevail, "focal length" is a better description for a lens... the focal length of a lens remains the same regardless of "format" but angle of view does not.

Nikon F mount cameras can take the same lens whether the camera is FX or DX so describing that lens by "angle of view" is meaningless; the angle of view of the lens is different for DX and FX cameras.

Abo

The commies of China love censorship.

Personally, I believe in freedom of speech...
as long as it does not contain obscene language or slander.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I have lived a lifetime working with physics and mathematics, so I am well able to visualize angles. Your thumb at arms length subtends an angle of about two degrees. Your little finger about half that. The "Hang Loose" sign at arms length spans approximately 25 degrees, the width of your fist at the same distance maybe about 10 degrees. So yes, I can estimate angles. But I would propose that for most photographic applications, the diagonal angle of view as specified for lenses is the next thing to useless in practice. We simply don't frame our images that way. (Well, some folks do, but they receive a lot of criticism for it, especially if they then post here.)

So my suggestion is to recognize that there is a lot of other complicated stuff associated with photography that is more important. Let's quit complicating this.

lositton Loc: Pensacola, FL

Sorry, I don't know how to delete my comment.

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

Bravo. If you look through your viewfinder, and it ain't there, and you can’t find it, you ain’t gonna get it, aov and fov make no diff.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Not intentionally...

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

The government grants free speech, but private companies like this web site are free to ban people for rude and insulting language all they like. And I wish they would take more advantage of that.

broncomaniac Loc: Lynchburg, VA

I knew. Instantly, at that.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I’ve already said it...square is a special rectangle therefore no landscape or portrait...

Glenn Harve

Mountains out of molehills. Use a macro or a telephoto, its still a molehill.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

As I have often mentioned on this forum, starting a thread with a negative attitude never accomplishes much and never ends well and untainted with rancor and nasty responses. Instead of insisting that folds should stop expressing themselves in terminology that they are conversant with, criticizing their approach to any subject or attacking their knowledge or lack thereof, why not offer a tutorial on the subject explain all the elements of focal length, the optics involved, angle of coverage, and how these factors interact with various formats. A simple chart or graph can illustrate the theories and accompanying photographs would be a significant visual aid. Perha a "lexicon" of photograph/optical terminology that clarifies many misconceptions, confusing theories, and misused terminology. This would take a lot less energy than creating a tirade and insulting everyone's intelligence from the onset.

For those who are technically minded, I am sure that they have studied the specifications of all their lenses even before the purchase and are very familiar with the angle of view, coverage and all the other optical aspects of all their prime lenses and various zoom focal lengths. For folks who are no that familiar with the finite details, I am sure they know the basic effect of wide-angle, normal, and telephoto lenses for the cameras that they own and use.

Even those photographers, that I know who are well versed in mathematics and physics, when it comes to many picture-taking situations, they also work instinctively and I have never seen savvy shooters doing scientific or mathematical calculations while seriously engrossed in their photographic subjects. Some of the most important skill sets in photography are being about to judge distances, plan perspectives and composition, and determine lens usage instinctively, spontaneously, quickly and almost as second nature. Knowing the theory is great but practice, experimentation, and experience are the best "teachers".

Even the least technically inclined will soon visually learn what lenses and focal length settings will result in. It's right before their eyes in the viewfinder and on the LCD screen at the back of the camera.

Abo

You are now denying your own post (Below) ROFL

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

The result of AoV depends greatly on subject distance regardless of orientation. 10 degrees at 2 feet is very different in what is viewed in 10 degrees at 200 feet.