Considering only horizontal angle of view (as one might for landscape)
the conversion factor is 3.5. The 65mm lens has approx. the same
horizontal angle of view on 4x5 (88.7 degrees) as an 18.5mm lens on 35mm
(88.4 degrees).
Chuck Norcutt
On 2/1/2012 10:49 AM, Sawyer, Edward wrote:
> A good field camera, and 2 or 3 lenses will satisfy all those desires, and
> may even be hand-holdable. Given the movements available with 4x5, you won't
> need as wide or long a set of lenses as you might think. With large image
> circles, even moderate wides are really truly wide in terms of what they can
> capture.
>
> I think a nice set up would include 90mm, 150mm and/or 210mm. Then maybe add
> 65~75mm and 300~360mm on the far ends.
>
> I have a 65, 90, 150, 210, and 360 and it covers all I need and then some. A
> 450 would be nice but that's about all I could imagine needing to add.
>
> (divide focal lengths by 3 for approx 35mm FOV.)
>
> -Ed
>
>
>
> On 2/1/12 6:16 AM, "olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
> <olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Well, I'm just patiently waiting for the right time and camera to come
>> along. I really do like all the movements that 4x5 give you. It's great to
>> be able to have foreground to distance all in focus. It's even better to
>> have shifts to keep the verticals vertical.
>>
>> But I really want telephoto and wide-angle lenses. I like the 100mm (35ff
>> equivalent) and 24mm focal lengths and would prefer to have that in 4x5. It
>> just would fit my vision better.
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|