Crop sensor...I just don't get it.
May 9, 2012 15:53:30 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I'm thinking the same thing as MT- having shot a lot of different formats, I know about cropped sensors, but think it COULD possibly be confusing to a newbie...Perhaps if there were a real image in the illustration instead of a blue circle it wouldn't be so abstract? Maybe MT's eagle doing the backstroke?
Nikonian72 wrote:
Do you find this FAQ or the charts (especially text in #3) confusing? http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-26503-1.html
I'm thinking the same thing as MT- having shot a lot of different formats, I know about cropped sensors, but think it COULD possibly be confusing to a newbie...Perhaps if there were a real image in the illustration instead of a blue circle it wouldn't be so abstract? Maybe MT's eagle doing the backstroke?
Backstroke???
I thought he had one too many Wild Turkeys!!
May 9, 2012 15:59:26 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Backstroke???
I thought he had one too many Wild Turkeys!!
Backstroke???
I thought he had one too many Wild Turkeys!!
That was you!
May 9, 2012 16:06:38 #
May 9, 2012 16:40:59 #
MT Shooter wrote:
The first chart is courtesy of MT Shooter's research. None of these charts are mine; all are public domain on the internet. quote=ward5311 quote=Nikonian72 quote=ward5311 ... (show quote)
May 9, 2012 16:57:08 #
Many folks think that a 50mm FX lens will yield a 1.5 (Nikon) MAGNIFICATION but that is not the case.......field of view and magnification are two different issues.
The 8 foot window vs the 5 ft window example explains it best, IMHO
(less available scene, but no additional magnification)
The 8 foot window vs the 5 ft window example explains it best, IMHO
(less available scene, but no additional magnification)
May 9, 2012 17:04:11 #
MT_Shooter brings up a point that is important to me. There are so many different sensor sizes now. When I see lens data given with a photo I like to see the 35 mm (full frame) equivalent given so I can have some idea of just how much tele or wide-angle was used for the shot. Then e.g., I can grasp how much "Wow!" is appropriate for how well the stabilization worked, or what results I might expect if I try a similar setup. 35 mm is ingrained in my experience. I understand it best as a lens reference point, whether digital or film is used.
May 9, 2012 17:13:01 #
My interest was helping out a newbie..this subject can get very confusing as evidenced here...I will defer to MT as I know his knowledge far outceeds my own. The chart is confusing to newbies and I tried to draw a simple analogy. Thanks to Goofy for his previous help in understanding this issue. I think any newbie should now have enough references now to help them understand. I will attempt no further help on this subject.
May 9, 2012 17:30:14 #
How about this!!! 50mm lens on FX body = "normal image"
50mm lens on DX body = "mini-telephoto image".
50mm lens on DX body = "mini-telephoto image".
May 9, 2012 17:42:53 #
NIKONUT wrote:
Close enough.How about this!!! 50mm lens on FX body = "normal image". 50mm lens on DX body = "mini-telephoto image".
May 9, 2012 18:01:22 #
ward5311 wrote:
My interest was helping out a newbie..this subject can get very confusing as evidenced here...I will defer to MT as I know his knowledge far outceeds my own. The chart is confusing to newbies and I tried to draw a simple analogy. Thanks to Goofy for his previous help in understanding this issue. I think any newbie should now have enough references now to help them understand. I will attempt no further help on this subject.
but you know it will come up again...
May 9, 2012 18:05:12 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
but you know it will come up again...
ward5311 wrote:
My interest was helping out a newbie..this subject can get very confusing as evidenced here...I will defer to MT as I know his knowledge far outceeds my own. The chart is confusing to newbies and I tried to draw a simple analogy. Thanks to Goofy for his previous help in understanding this issue. I think any newbie should now have enough references now to help them understand. I will attempt no further help on this subject.
but you know it will come up again...
You're right Goofy..but I shall not pitch in to try and help..I'm done.
May 9, 2012 18:07:55 #
ward5311 wrote:
You're right Goofy..but I shall not pitch in to try and help..I'm done.
You're right Goofy..but I shall not pitch in to try and help..I'm done.
Re: Your avitar: Loved the movie but can't remember- did it take place in Georgia?
May 9, 2012 18:09:34 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Re: Your avitar: Loved the movie but can't remember- did it take place in Georgia?
ward5311 wrote:
You're right Goofy..but I shall not pitch in to try and help..I'm done.
You're right Goofy..but I shall not pitch in to try and help..I'm done.
Re: Your avitar: Loved the movie but can't remember- did it take place in Georgia?
Bayou Labatrie...A L A B A M A.... some parts were filmed in Savannah GA.....as Forrest Gump would say
"stupid is as stupid does"...which is a good way to end this topic.
May 9, 2012 18:13:41 #
ward5311 wrote:
Bayou Labatrie...A L A B A M A.... some parts were filmed in Savannah GA.....as Forrest Gump would say
"stupid is as stupid does"...which is a good way to end this topic.
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Re: Your avitar: Loved the movie but can't remember- did it take place in Georgia?
ward5311 wrote:
You're right Goofy..but I shall not pitch in to try and help..I'm done.
You're right Goofy..but I shall not pitch in to try and help..I'm done.
Re: Your avitar: Loved the movie but can't remember- did it take place in Georgia?
Bayou Labatrie...A L A B A M A.... some parts were filmed in Savannah GA.....as Forrest Gump would say
"stupid is as stupid does"...which is a good way to end this topic.
LOL!!!! I remember now.Thanks
May 9, 2012 18:25:37 #
MT Shooter wrote:
quote=GoofyNewfie quote=MT Shooter br That is ... (show quote)
MT, I love that eagle! Did you reverse it or actually capture it that way?
Jim D
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.