OK Pros, I’ve been contemplating this and haven’t been able to come to a conclusion.
Consider this: Same camera, same position, same subject (except of obvious field of view), same settings (ss, aperture, iso, white balance, basically everything), same quality and features on lenses - like number and shape of aperture blades …
One photo with 35mm lens, one with 50mm lens.
Then, in post processing, the only adjustment is to crop the image made with the 35mm lens so it matches the image made with the 50mm lens.
Finally, my curiosity - other than the obvious file size difference, are there any other differences in the images such as compression, distortion, etc. or are the images virtually identical?
They will be virtually identical. Technically, the 50mm image should have less distortion, but that assumes the 35mm lens even has any distortion.
I've never tested your cropping idea to match up the two images, but I will note I occasionally work with one camera with a 35 and the other with a 50. Not that much, but more than once in the junkyard at Old Car City, I'll have one film camera and one digital. I own multiple 50mm lenses, but only one 35mm. The images are interchangeable with the difference being film vs digital. Even with multiple 50s, I know in my heart I prefer the just slightly wider 35mm.
The slightly longer focal length offers maybe a bit more out of focus blur. That is something I can see as a difference, say when looking at images from both lenses, both at f/2 and both with 8 blades.
Differences between the lenses to start with:
Field of view is different.
DOF is different. (longer on the 35mm)
Field compression is different. (Due to DOF)
Relative perspective is different. (35 will make objects look wider at close range. Details will quickly be lost)
When you crop, you will never be able to have a perfect match.
Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy
If you do not change position and simply crop the 35mm image, they will be identical in terms of relationship of objects in the frame (assuming the lenses do not have distortion), as CHG_CANON says. And yes, there will be a change in DOF, equal roughly to one stop more closed on the 50mm.
OK Pros, I’ve been contemplating this and haven’t ... (
It is somewhat hard to say - on the one hand, the smaller absolute size of f8 (or any other aperture) of the 35mm vs the 50mm lens would tend to increase DOF - on the other hand, the increased magnification needed of the cropped image for a given viewing size would tend to shrink the perceived DOF.
What two lenses would be good candidates to test or demonstrate OP's scenario?
My 35 and 50 are so different in build and quality that I could always tell the difference in the image except at small apertures and the most sterile lighting conditions. The lens effects are just too distinct.
Edit: I'd say if you use the same lens, say a 24 to 70, then the images will be indistinguishable except as a couple noted regarding the apparent DoF.
Do you have a varifocal lens that covers both focal lengths?
If so you can probably answer your question
If you want to reply, then register here
. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.