Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: [OM] 50/2 macro vs. 90/2 macro

Subject: Re: Re: [OM] 50/2 macro vs. 90/2 macro
From: "Terry and Tracey" <foxcroft@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:30:54 +1100
All very true. But this is why they state the angle of view for infinity
focus lenses (at infinity), and macro at max magnification. Does the actual
angle of view change? Buggered if I know. But as I rack my lens out, less
appears in the viewfinder.

Foxy

----- Original Message -----

> On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:52:54PM +1100, Terry and Tracey wrote:
> > The angle doesn't change. But as you wind the focus out, the image size
> > grows. This gives the effect of reducing the angle. Try it. Put
something on
> > the floor. Sit the camera near it on infinity focus. See the area that
the
> > viewfinder covers. Then rack out the focussing fully (use a macro lens
that
> > focusses by extension). Note the corners of the viewfinder and how they
> > disappear as you wind out.
>
> IMHO, does the angle change, when you reduce the angle?
> It seems strange but it is so, that the angle change when you thouth out
> a convetional lens.
> Have a look at a Olympus lens overview. Compare the angle of view
> of the 2/21mm with the angle of view of the Zuko Macro 20mm/F2.
> 92° vs. 9°(at highest magnification). Well, when ou use the 2/21 on the
> Bellows, the angle is just the same.
>
> To realize this, it is good to accept the meaning of the sentence, it is
the
> apperture which makes/renders the picture. First I heard this I thought it
> is stupid, out-of-date old fashined photograpic knowlede.
>
> But it means, it is the distance of the apperture, which determines the
angle
> of field. (The focal lenght is just rlevant, of what is in focus at this
distance.)
>
>
> >
> > This does not apply to internal focussing lenses that I know of. I
believe
> > they internally change their focal length to make it shorter. A previous
> > subscriber stated that there is no reason why they cannot internally
focus
> > and keep their focal length.
> >
> > So internal focussing, reduce effective focal length. Extension,
increase
> > effective focal length.
>
> Now this depends on your point of view, how you define focal lenght.
>
> Frieder Faig
> >
> > Your kilometrage may vary.
> >
> > Foxy
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > >Why not? The angle covered is still in proportion to the focal
> > > >length. But at macro distances, the angle reduces significantly. At
> > > >1:1 it is half the angle ar infinity. So the shutter speed
> > > >requirement goes up proportionately.
> > >
> > > I do not really think that the angle of acceptance changes because of
> > > the focusing distance. The focal length of the lens does not change
> > > according to focus distance. Your 90 mm macro lens is twice as far
> > > away as a 50 mm when you are 1:1.



< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz