Gee. What could go wrong? UHH member says ignore the math, I have this all figured out better than the manufacturers.
User ID wrote:
The trubble with you is that youre always ignoring UHH Sacred Tradition.
SuperflyTNT vs User ID...now that's entertainment!
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
PHRubin wrote:
You also left out the fact that the 2 cameras have different pixel counts, 20% different.
No. That is what I pointed out. It’s the main reason for the difference. I just didn’t do the numbers for you.
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
Longshadow wrote:
All I know is I can adjust the zoom so that the subject looks about the same distance in the viewfinder as it does with my eye. For the Canon APSC body that turns out to be just under 35mm on the lens. And what do you know, 50/1.6 (APSC factor) is 31mm. That's all I need to know, the setting that makes it look like what I see. But I adjust the zoom for what composition I desire, regardless of crop factor or focal length anyway.
I don't need to know the physics behind it.
Or make a molehill into a mountain.
All I know is I can adjust the zoom so that the su... (
show quote)
What looks same in VF will be different in on screen view if sensor is different. That’s the point!
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
george19 wrote:
Bingo! Then all you need is a reference, something like a standard field of view on a 24 x 36 mm piece of film is 43 degrees (I made that up) using a 50 mm lens.
Field of view equal will display larger or smaller depending on sensor size AND sensor pixels.
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
SuperflyTNT wrote:
This is a completely invalid comparison. Physical dimensions of a digital image make no sense for comparison.
Wrong. They affect ability to crop for small distant subjects.
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
It’s fun getting all that arguing about simple truths.
a6k wrote:
What looks same in VF will be different in on screen view if sensor is different. That’s the point!
That model camera would stink. They didn't make the viewfinder commensurate with the image on the sensor?
Mine is the same.
(Actually I get a skosh more in the picture that what I see in the viewfinder.)
For the same camera the image size varies with the square of the focal length! Math matters if you use the correct formula.
jno wrote:
For the same camera the image size varies with the square of the focal length! Math matters if you use the correct formula.
Then to some, it don't...
The only thing that matters is this. If the photo you end with looks like what you envisioned form the start looks the same, who cares what shutter speed, focal length, f-stop, ISO or camera you use.
jno wrote:
For the same camera the image size varies with the square of the focal length! Math matters if you use the correct formula.
Your second sentence is in conflict with your first sentence. However your whole post is in full compliance with UHH Sacred Tradition. IOW, you have mistaken schidt for shinola.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.