What is the best focal length and why is it 50mm?
It's very close to the "normal" focal length of 43mm. 35mm Is too wide imho, especially for fool framers like myself.
It's not.
50mm still distorts the image, and is therefore the wrong focal length.
85mm however is almost exactly like for like between what your eye sees and what the viewfinder and sensor actually processes.
8mm and crop, fag
>>2801523
...
>>2801520
I've never mastered our friend the nifty 50. I like wides in the 21-28mm range, and can have fun with 85mm and upwards. Maybe I just need to get good.
The wider the better.
50mm is boring.
Telephoto is retarded.
>>2801520
>What is the best focal length and why is it 50mm?
because it's not
>>2801523
>85mm however is almost exactly like for like between what your eye sees and what the viewfinder and sensor actually processes.
you may have meant to write 42mm or so
>>2801558
>Telephoto is retarded.
if you don't really want a job, that is
Save up for 24-70 already, you poor retards
>>2801559
>if you don't really want a job
I had a job.
I quit to start my own business.
So yeah.
>sometimes like wide angle, for playing with perspective or just including a huge sweeping vista
>sometimes like telephoto, for filling the frame with one subject
>never cared much for normal
to me normal was always just a kind of neither-one-thing-nor-another no mans land. I dunno, maybe I'm just a pleb.
40mm is the focal length I most prefer, it feels like a nice compromise. It's functionally wide enough to shoot most things but at least for me doesn't look as distorted as a 35mm.
I wish they made nicer 40mm primes for eos mount.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 1100D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.8 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2013:11:12 21:06:53 Exposure Time 1/60 sec F-Number f/4.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/4.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 28.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2801529
u tha fag
The best focal length is the one that matches what you perceive. That could be 85 because you like to focus on the details, or the 50 for the single subjects, or 35 for a bit of the environment and subject together, and even 28 because you don't look at anything but the environment.
It all depends what focal length you 'see' in.
>>2801559
>mfw I have sex with my voigtlander 40mm everynight
>>2801656
>The best focal length is the one that matches what you perceive.
citation needed
it may be the one you prefer, but if you want to shoot a rally in the desert you probably want one long tele at least
>>2801656
your detail view is upwards of 400mm field of view, and your total field of vision is wider than 180 degrees, so none of the focal lengths you listed are even close to being accurate. It's impossible to match human vision with a lens. your brain is doing crazy levels of shit behind the scenes and can even give the effect of a digital zoom, giving you enhanced detail and priority in far away objects. When you're reading this text, you can't even decipher words a mere four lines above. Lenses don't behave that way, and if they did, you would throw them in the trash.
>>2801662
Not to mention our eyes actually see things upside-down. Our mind then flips the image
>>2801661
>2016
>Not taking position under a desert rally jump and shooting upwards at flying cars with a 21mm
Stay pleb tier
>>2801664
Strictly speaking, whichever way up we see things is by definition the right way up
>>2801662
But you perceive things with fields of views similar to that range of lens focal lengths. What you focus on, what you see, is within those fields of view. You have peripheral vision wider than any of those focal lengths, and you have detailed vision narrower than those.
Unless you think it's natural to do street photography with a 400.
>stop being an autistic fuck arguing for the sake of arguing
>>2801666
Optics flips the image. When you look at someone standing in front of you, the light from their feet is hitting your retina at the top of your eye, and the light from their head hits at the bottom.
>>2801670
>But you perceive things with fields of views similar to that range of lens focal lengths
No, you don't.
>What you focus on, what you see, is within those fields of view.
No, it isn't.
>Unless you think it's natural to do street photography with a 400.
Where was that implied?
How am I being autistic? You're the one trying to add numbers and measurements to something for no reason, without any concept for how your own eyes work. I'm merely trying to correct a misconception, by saying "stop worrying about the dumb 'what the human eye sees' thing that people for some reason try to attribute to lenses. It doesn't work.
Look at the bottom left hand side of your computer monitor. You can barely make out the top right corner. If you were using a camera with a 35mm equivalent lens, that would not be the case. Your detail view (or what you refer to as "what you focus on, what you see") is about three degrees side to side. What's the field of view on an 85mm?
HAHAHA HOW ARE OTHER FOCAL LENGTH EVEN REAL HAHAHA LIKE NIGGA JUST STEP BACKWARDS OR FORWARDS HAHAHA
>>2801682
Field of view and perspective are both useful storytelling techniques, and to use both, you need multiple focal lengths (or lots of resolution to crop in post)
>>2801520
>He doesn't know the real standard focal length is 43mm on FF
>Only Pentax has a true standard focal length lens
>His much acclaimed lens is a filthy telephoto
Much keks
>>2801684
You might be interested to look up the word "telephoto" in a dictionary.
>>2801685
It may be a joke, since it's 7mm longer than his 43mm?
>>2801687
The point is that a telephoto lens is a specific optical design type that allows the lens to be shorter than its focal length. A long lens is not necessarily a telephoto, just as not all wide angles are necessarily retrofocal. You could have a 600mm lens on a crop sensor that still isn't telephoto.
I really like 85mm. 28mm is very nice for wide shots too.
I wish there was a good 85mm lens for Canon DSLRs.
>>2801693
Like, I don't know, the 85/1.8 EF and the 50 1.8 on crop bodies?
>i don't know anything about canon lenses, i'm assuming even canon can't fuck up something as classic as an 85/2
>>2801693
One of the best lenses ever made is a canon 85mm??
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 5D Mark III Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.1 (Macintosh) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.2 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2014:02:10 09:54:50 Exposure Time 1/1600 sec F-Number f/1.2 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 250 Lens Aperture f/1.2 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 85.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2801693
>I wish there was a good 85mm lens for Canon DSLRs.
Canon 85/1.2L (two revisions) and 85/1.8, Sigma 85/1.4EX, Samyang 85/1.4, a bunch of adapted M42 lenses. Yeah, all of those really suck, I bet.
>>2801695
The current 85 f/1.8 produces dull colors and tons of CA. Garbage.
>>2801699
I haven't owned the 1.2 so I won't comment. It is too big for me to want to carry it often.
>>2801700
The Sigma is OK but couldn't focus at longer distances to save its life. Simply can't trust this brand any more and I refuse to give them any more of my money. The Samyang lens has great image quality (as long as you like flare, which I do), but in the end you're lying to yourself if you think it's not a complete chore to use a manual-everything lens.
They all have their shortcomings (for my application). I'll wait for Canon's update of the 85/1.8
/gearfag post
>>2801710
It's actually really well balanced on my 5diii.
Recently took it to Costa Rica as my main lens, carried for 2 weeks with a battery grip... wasn't painful at all.
>>2801710
>The current 85 f/1.8 produces dull colors
Didn't even finish the first sentence and your opinion already made it to the
>Garbage.
Well played!
EF 135mm f2.0 L
'Nuff said.
>>2801744
Sorry if you can't see it.
>>2801774
That's my next lens purchase, but it's not going to be for a few months :(
leica apo summicron 50mm f2 asph
>>2801792
Same here, man.
I know that feel ;_;
>>2801805
>Pentacon 135/2.8
>15 aperture blades
fuck. This is what dreams are made of.
that digitalrev video is weird. doesn't really resolve much in my opinion. i like the girl comparison, but i almost feel like each girl was actually the opposite lense.
>>2801901
Maybe it's different in such a dense city like HK, but i've never had a problem with the 50mm on a city street. Perhaps if you're in an alley or something, or snap a bunch from low and high angles.
They said that the 50mm is awkward because you're not as close. If anything I find the 35mm way more awkward. Even my friends get uncomfortable.
>>2801905
You need a 24mm, and a lot more charisma.
>>2801921
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2010:10:16 20:45:06 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 413 Image Height 395
if you faggots actually shot instead of bickering on online boards, you'd realize that it's actually a matter of personal taste and only depends on your preferred style of shooting
>>2801934
Yeah, I hate those fuckers who post on online boards.
>>2801938
You can post here AND shoot, but many people only post here. Only the latter are the issue, and even then, only when they act like dicks and profess stuff they've read out of context, as gospel.
>>2801934
isn't that what the thread is about though? debating the advantages and disadvantages of each and why certain users prefer one to the other.
>=50 if i want a portrait. <=35 if i want more environment and context.
i like to think its the one that gives you, yourself the most freedom of expression, evokes imaginative thinking, originality, authenticity, genuineness. its likely to change based on circumstances and conditions, mood, and point in time as relates to artistic endeavor
NIFTY
I
F
T
Y
FIFTY
I
F
T
Y
I love the f/1.8 STM it's such an awesome little lens. I prefer it to the f/1.2L USM (too big, slow to focus) and the f/1.4 USM (too soft wide open).
Only other lens I would consider is the Sigma f/1.4 ART.
50mm Is such a noice focal length especially on fool frame.
>>2801699
but it's not.
The Zeiss 1.2 is better optically. The Canon lens is a lens for cucks and poorfags. People only want it because people hype the lens up as being professional and desired. In reality, the lens is nowhere near worth it.
>>2802097
pretty much this for me. it gets harder to isolate the subject as you go wider unless you press the lens to their face.
I feel like we went back in time.
Same topic, same post title, same retarded arguments as a thread like two months ago.
>>2802260
https://translate.google.com.au/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marcocavina.com%2Farticoli_fotografici%2FTEST_85mm_f_1%2C2%2F00_pag.htm&edit-text=&act=url
W/evs bro.
for me, the best lens you can ever get is a 24 1.4
>>2801520
those two examples aren't even close to the same framing. bad comparison.
>>2801560
>zoom
shit I didn't realize we were in a mazda commercial
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfyTO8xLjvQ
>>2802901
>pretentious faggot
nothing wrong with a zoom you pussy
>>2802901
b-but its 5/5 bretty good
>>2802968
i-it's just a joke, bro. just a social experiment
>>2802260
The zeiss 85mm unfortunately really isn't that good compared to the zeiss 35mm f2 distagon. If you want f1.2, cannon is a better choice because of the auto focus but the electronic appature is kind of horseshit and prone to problems and its an $1800 lens. The only real choice is the nikon 85mm. Fucking god tier and cheap.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Ver.1.00 Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.7 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 19126 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:03:23 08:39:11 Exposure Time 1/500 sec F-Number f/1.8 Exposure Bias 0 EV Light Source Daylight Fluorescent Focal Length 85.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2992 Image Height 2000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control Low Gain Up Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2803517
>The zeiss 85mm unfortunately really isn't that good compared to the zeiss 35mm f2 distagon.
Different focal length tho.
>If you want f1.2, cannon is a better choice because of the auto focus but the electronic aperture is kind of horseshit and prone to problems and its an $1800 lens.
Which is why it's trash. Even the other Zeiss 85's are better to use. Autofocus is not important at the expense of IQ.
>The only real choice is the nikon 85mm. Fucking god tier and cheap.
I agree, Unless you need extra DOF or that tiny little bit of extra light then a 1.8 is good enough. You're too late now though, you've exposed your post to the 1.2 L defenders.
>>2803531
>You're too late now though, you've exposed your post to the 1.2 L defenders.
I wish Samyang would make an 85/1.0 or something just to one-up Canon
the best lens would have to be a 35mm or a 50mm. anything above makes the lighting composition too stiff.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon PowerShot SX510 HS Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.4 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Lens Size 4.30 - 129.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.01 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 180 dpi Vertical Resolution 180 dpi Image Created 2016:01:03 02:14:15 Exposure Time 0.3 sec F-Number f/3.4 ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/3.4 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.30 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1920 Image Height 1080 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Tv-Priority Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Center-Weighted Sharpness Normal Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode Single Drive Mode Single Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Superfine Macro Mode Normal Subject Distance 65.530 m White Balance Tungsten Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 224 Image Number 113-2359
