Straw man indeed but the point I was making was that the eye is a very
different thing. That peripheral vision is critical to the way that the eye and
brain operate. The best analogy in photography is using a rangefinder like a
Leica M3 or Voiglander R (the one with the 11 finder) where you can operate
both eyes open and have a consciousness of what's going on outside the frame.
Ot the amazing old Voiglander Kontur finders - a floating brightline in your
normal vision!
Accepting your argument is like saying that 'I have a great 21mm lens but the
edges are soft and I always have to crop the images so really it's a 35mm
lens.' The eye is not a 50mm lens because the field of view constantly flicks
around and creates a composite impression.
Andrew Fildes
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 11/05/2011, at 3:04 AM, Mike Lazzari wrote:
>> It's all a nonsense. If the idea is that a 'normal' lens gives a similar
>> view to the human eye, then...
> Straw man arguments aside I think you are confusing the peripheral vision of
> the eye with the focal length equivalence of center vision. I think there is
> good evidence that it falls between 50-55mm. In the real world much like Bill
> I find a FL of around 28-35 to be a reasonable facsimile of the way I view
> the world.
>
> Mike
>
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|