Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 03 Feb 2014 (Monday) 16:58
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Focal Length Variations

 
KirkS518
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Feb 03, 2014 16:58 |  #1

So I have 2 lenses that are 17mm-XXmm zooms. Two different manufacturers. I'm doing a lens comparison as controlled as I possibly can.

One of the first things I noticed, was that the frame was filled differently between the two lenses at 17mm. One definitely gives a larger FoV. When you look at the 2 images, the one that gives a great FoV has the same amount of additional area captured on both the left and right sides of the frame, and top and bottom. Top and bottom is not as great of a difference as the left and right.

Is it possible to determine which lens is actually giving a 17mm focal length/Fov/AoV? All shots were taken on a tripod, indoors, and nothing was moved (as evidenced by the equal amount of additional subject in the frame all around).

If it's a detailed mathematical equation, I'll skip it, but is there a chart or anything that could be used from X distance to the chart?


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Feb 03, 2014 17:18 |  #2

Very common... It is rare any lens is exact to the specification.

For example, the 70-200 II at 70mm and the 24-70 II at 70mm are drastically different... The 24-70 appears less than 70mm and the 70-200 more.

If you look at any lens patent, they round... So a 25.2-65.4mm may be billed as a 24-70... For whatever reason... A 98-372mm on a parent would be a 100-400 and so forth.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Feb 03, 2014 17:23 |  #3

Ok, so I should ignore it? I was trying to make a layered .gif for the comparison, and they don't line up like I hoped (same exact crop locations). I guess it'll have to be side-by-side comps then.


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Feb 03, 2014 17:26 |  #4

Yeah, ignore it. There is no issue, especially between two different companies and such. No lens is exact to what is stamped on it.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dodgyexposure
Goldmember
2,874 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 234
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 03, 2014 17:32 |  #5

Agree that it s a common problem/issue, and has no substantive real world effect in most situations, but I would like to know if there is an easy way to work out the actual focal length of a particular lens (as opposed to "this 35mm has a wider FOV than that 35mm", e.g.). Anyone?


Cheers, Damien

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick3434
Goldmember
Avatar
1,568 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 216
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Trespassing in South Florida
     
Feb 03, 2014 17:39 |  #6

Would this apply to zooms only or primes as well? Just out of curiosity. I would think primes would be easier to make exact, or the same meaning 3 copies of a 50mm from same company are all 51mm etc.


Everything is relative.
Gear: 6D, Unholy Trinity:twisted: (24Lii, sigma 50A, 135L), and for the other ends of the spectrum, sigmaEX 14mm2.8 and sigmaEX 100-300F4.
Fuji X-e2, Rokinon 8 2.8 Fisheye II, Fuji 14 2.8, Fuji 18-55, Fuji 23 1.4
FlikR (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 165
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Feb 03, 2014 18:00 |  #7

On top of what's been said above, most if not all lenses' focal length is calculated or measured at infinity focus. Focus any closer and all bets are off comparing two different model lenses at the same marked focal length.

Manufacturers also tend to round off focal length to commonly marketed values. For example, a lens marked "50mm" could easily be anywhere from 46 to 54mm or so in reality (again, measured at infinity focus).

In addition, there are both design and manufacturing tolerances that figure in to the errors that are sometimes notices.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Feb 03, 2014 18:03 |  #8

In regards to the FL being calculated at infinity, how does one actually focus to infinity? Always wondered about that...


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
panicatnabisco
Senior Member
Avatar
972 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 329
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Mountain View, CA
     
Feb 03, 2014 19:16 |  #9

... you spin the focus ring to the infinity marker


Canon 1DX III | 1DX | 6D II | 6D | 16-35/2.8 II | 24-70/2.8 II | 35/1.4 II | 50/1.8 | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 85/1.4 IS | 100/2.8 IS macro | 200mm f/2 | 400/2.8 IS II | 2xIII
Leica M8.2 | Noctilux 50 f/1 | Elmarit 90/2.8
afimages.net (external link) | Facebook (external link) | instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,434 posts
Gallery: 223 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4798
Joined Dec 2008
     
Feb 03, 2014 19:21 as a reply to  @ panicatnabisco's post |  #10

I seem to recall seeing 70-200's compared. Both set at 200mm, brand 'X' was about 190, brand 'Y' was closer to 205. But it's been a while.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,773 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Likes: 551
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Feb 03, 2014 19:34 |  #11

Canon 24-70 MkII @70 mm tripod mounted

IMAGE: http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e66/MakisM/Canon/Focal%20Length/IMG_8764DT_zps1eb29c2f.jpg~original
IMAGE LINK: http://s37.photobucket​.com …64DT_zps1eb29c2​f.jpg.html  (external link)

Canon 70-200 MkII same position tripod mounted

IMAGE: http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e66/MakisM/Canon/Focal%20Length/IMG_8765DT_zps898d97c7.jpg~original
IMAGE LINK: http://s37.photobucket​.com …65DT_zps898d97c​7.jpg.html  (external link)

I have also compared the Canon EF-S 18-200 to the EF 70-200 MkII and the 200 mm in the 18-200 are 185 mm (as per Exif data) on the EF 70-200 MkII. Focused far away, but not infinity. I just can't find the photo...

Gerry
Canon R6 MkII/Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/Σ 105ΕΧ DG/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

1,387 views & 0 likes for this thread, 8 members have posted to it.
Focal Length Variations
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is semonsters
1053 guests, 104 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.