me: > > BUT if I were to use 'equivalent' focal length lenses (lenses on > each format that has close to the same field of view) Q/B: > What do you mean "equivalent" focal length? I know this is a difficult concept for Journalists to grasp Bob, so let's leave them out of the equation (Our local state wide rag on the weekend showed the pixelated shuttle pics with the accompanying explanation that they were 'high resolution' <cringe!> ) > The focal length of a lens is *defined* by its field of view. > If you use a sensor half as wide, the focal length halves too. > The problem is that 35mm was around so long people got the two > confused. crap. you're right! I just looked through a hole I made in a piece of paper with a paperclip and all of a sudden everything looked really big! > This only applies to digital cameras of course: with traditional film > cropping after a photo is taken does not change focal length. Oh, you're right :-( Re-examining my foray into experimental optical physics I discovered things were not really bigger, I just couldn't see the periphery and it confused me there for a moment. > Well, that's what it says in all the camera mags ;o) well that does it for me then.. those guys are always right! karl the konfused
