Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

50mm is about what the human eye sees, right?

  • 07-08-2006 11:57am
    #1
    Fenster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,763 ✭✭✭


    I'm a user of those new-fangled zoom lenses. I think it was my brother who mentioned to me that a 50mm zoom is roughly equivlent to what the human eye sees.

    Uhm, is this correct?


Comments

  • #2
    elven
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,966 ✭✭✭elven


    That's the generally accepted equivalent, yup.


  • #3
    Borderfox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    In a full frame I think it is, with an EOS 350D it has a 1.6x multiplier so it would be probably be a 30mm ?


  • #4
    Fenster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,763 ✭✭✭Fenster


    Cheers, I'm wondering as I plan to spend at least part of the winter wandering around the desert taking landscape photos - that spectacular range of mountains marching accross the horizon coming out as dots is fairly annoying.


  • #5
    311
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,332 ✭✭✭311


    Theres a canon 35mm 2.0 which would be a great buy I think. You'd get even better use from it when the other cameras come down in price.


  • #6
    Fenster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,763 ✭✭✭Fenster


    I have a f/2.8 28mm lens right now, so its near enough, I guess.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Oriel
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,154 ✭✭✭Oriel


    My eyes are about 75mm, with the 1.5 of a Nikon, that's about right, yeah.


  • #8
    mtracey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 264 ✭✭mtracey


    You're going to take landscape photographs with a 50mm ? Not very wide.
    I think you'll regret not having the width to be honest.

    What the eye sees is not the area which a 50mm (or 30mm) sees when you're taking about landscape.


  • #9
    JackKelly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,225 ✭✭✭JackKelly


    yea, if you are looking to take landscape photographs, you will want a much wider lens, especially if your camera has a crop factor. Unfortunately, they can be expensive. If you have a Canon camera, have a look at the Canon 10-22.


  • #10
    mtracey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 264 ✭✭mtracey


    Of course you don't need to go that wide for landscape, although its nice. 18mm works too and would be cheaper


  • #11
    Fajitas!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    I had a really interesting post typed out....but I'll just stick this up instead...

    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    HDX
    Closed Accounts Posts: 124 ✭✭HDX


    Fajitas! wrote:
    I had a really interesting post typed out....but I'll just stick this up instead...

    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html


    are you the guy whose mammy works in the bus station/train station?


  • #13
    Fajitas!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    Eh?


  • #14
    HDX
    Closed Accounts Posts: 124 ✭✭HDX


    oh must have ya mixed up sorry...


  • #15
    Fajitas!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    I didn't say that, I just don't have a clue who you are?


Advertisement