I was thinking the same thing. What's important isn't the absolute comparison, but that we each get familiar with the equipment we use and apply it to the task at hand in a satisfying manner.

I use Micro 4/3, which has a nominal 2X magnification factor (not a crop factor, because the lenses are NATIVE to the format, unlike putting a full frame lens on APS-C). But I've used other formats, and understand the lens choices I needed to make for each of them.

In the photo lab where I worked back in the film days, we had equivalence charts that matched focal length and field of view coverage across both film formats and brands of lenses. They were helpful. Also helpful were depth of field indicators on lenses, which have all but disappeared. Now I carry the DOFC (depth of field calculator) app on my phone for the rare instances when I need to be precise.

We worry far too much about finding the perfect camera, lens, brand, format... When simple photographic education and experiences are what we need. I learn more behind the camera or in front of photo software than I do from endless debates about what gizmo is best. The proof is in the photograph.

I cook, and I don't know that anyone has ever asked me what pot or pan I used... Either they like the dish, or they don't.

I was thinking the same thing. What's important isn't the absolute comparison, but that we each get familiar with the equipment we use and apply it to the task at hand in a satisfying manner.

I use Micro 4/3, which has a nominal 2X magnification factor (not a crop factor, because the lenses are NATIVE to the format, unlike putting a full frame lens on APS-C). But I've used other formats, and understand the lens choices I needed to make for each of them.

In the photo lab where I worked back in the film days, we had equivalence charts that matched focal length and field of view coverage across both film formats and brands of lenses. They were helpful. Also helpful were depth of field indicators on lenses, which have all but disappeared. Now I carry the DOFC (depth of field calculator) app on my phone for the rare instances when I need to be precise.

We worry far too much about finding the perfect camera, lens, brand, format... When simple photographic education and experiences are what we need. I learn more behind the camera or in front of photo software than I do from endless debates about what gizmo is best. The proof is in the photograph.

I cook, and I don't know that anyone has ever asked me what pot or pan I used... Either they like the dish, or they don't.

I always understood that the 'standard' 35mm camera lens was closer to 45mm, meaning that most all 35mm SLR's of the era (the 1960's thru the 1990's) were using slightly telephoto lens as their 'standard' kit lens. I know that my Minolta SR-1 came with a 55mm lens, while my Minolta SRT-101 came with a 58mm kit lens. Later when I got my Minolta XG-M, it came with a 50mm lens, which by then had been decreed as the de-facto 'standard' lens. Note that my first 35mm camera, which I used back in high school, was a AGFA Silette, rangefinder camera with a 45mm lens.