Very new to photography.. please correct me, dont worry about my feelings lol

[scythefwd]

OK, JUST getting into photography. I have a pentax q10 that will be my primary shooter, because its easy to work with and instant gratification...

I also have a an old minolta 35mm slr that I want to play with.

F stop = depth of field.. larger stop, less area that can be in focus (distance wise) yes?
Focal length - determines how much FOV you have at the same distance.. - how is this different than zoom??
Shutter speed - must be matched to stop and light for proper exposure.. faster iso equiv.. faster shutter, brighter light, faster shutter, higher stop, faster shutter as light permits??

I plan on using the older minolta lenses I havefor the 35mm slr I plan on using with an adapter on the pentax. The pentax has a 1/2.3 sensor, and from what I'm seeing.. a crop factor of 5.33 or so? So a native lens will be marked at its 35mm equivilent yes (is that the standard??) and my 50mm lens will perform more like a 280mm lens in the fov dept yes?? is that roughly accurate?

 

[Designer]

Focal length - determines how much FOV you have at the same distance.. - how is this different than zoom??

A zoom lens is variable in focal length anywhere from the shortest to the longest in millimeters as printed on the lens.

The FOV is a combination of the focal length of the lens and the physical size of the sensor or film.

 

[scythefwd]

ok, so to over simplify this.. the FOV taking up the full frame will be smaller, so what I see in the pic will look larger than if I used a smaller focal length lens in the exact same conditions and position and distance from the object...

What does that do to the quality of the image? Will it intorduce noise or grain into my images? I've got a 200mm film camera lens that I think could be a total blast to play with using a remote shutter release and a tripod... the equivlent focal length would be.. what 1060ish with my tiny sensor (5.33-5.7 multiplication factor from what I can find on the net..)

 

[KmH]

Depth-of-filed is effected by the lens aperture, the point of focus distance, the lens focal length and the size of the media, be it film or an analog image sensor.

Understanding Depth of Field in Photography

 

[Derrel]

OK, JUST getting into photography. I have a pentax q10 that will be my primary shooter, because its easy to work with and instant gratification...

I also have a an old minolta 35mm slr that I want to play with.

F stop = depth of field.. larger stop, less area that can be in focus (distance wise) yes?
Focal length - determines how much FOV you have at the same distance.. - how is this different than zoom??
Shutter speed - must be matched to stop and light for proper exposure.. faster iso equiv.. faster shutter, brighter light, faster shutter, higher stop, faster shutter as light permits??

I plan on using the older minolta lenses I havefor the 35mm slr I plan on using with an adapter on the pentax. The pentax has a 1/2.3 sensor, and from what I'm seeing.. a crop factor of 5.33 or so? So a native lens will be marked at its 35mm equivilent yes (is that the standard??) and my 50mm lens will perform more like a 280mm lens in the fov dept yes?? is that roughly accurate?

You pretty much have everything described accurately I would say; not sure on the 1 and 2/3 FOV factor, but since you specify it as 5.33 that degree of precision makes me feel like it's been referenced so, yeah! 5.33x!!! I was not aware there were Minolta manual focus to Pentax Q adapters, but hey--why not! The Chinese have been making adapters like crazy the past few years, and selling them very affordably through e-Bay and the world wide web.

The 200mm lens on the little Q MIGHT indeed be a real hoot!

 

[scythefwd]

You're dead on about where and who's making the adapter. There are several companies doing it. I've seen everywhere from 5.33 on one place where they actually were using that size sensor as the example and came up with 5.33, and another calculator that says its 5.7. Either way, that would be insane if I'm comprehending the effects of a longer focal length...

Basically, the Focal Length (FL for now on in my post.. I'm lazy lol) gets longer which narrows the field of view. Since that field of view is getting smaller, but being recorded on the same size media (the sensor doesnt change size, the film doesnt change size, etc...), that smaller field of view will look like you had magnified the image?? So a 50mm may have a Field of View covering 12 ft at 100y area visible to the sensor(yeah, I know, inaccurate.. working concept, not for accuacy atm), a 100mm may only have 6 ft visible to the sensor and a 300 may only have 1 ft (I know its not that simple, and again, I know its not constricted for field of view with those FL)?

I guess my hangup on trying to wrap my head around this is the only optics I'm used to are rifle scopes. You can have a fixed power 4x scope.. things at 100y look 4x larger than with the naked eye... They dont give focal lengths though. I know some scopes rated at 4x have a larger fov than others, but then you're dealing with primary lenses, objective lenses, and other things that I dont think necissarily apply to a camera lens in the same way.

 

[Designer]

Basically, the Focal Length (FL for now on in my post.. I'm lazy lol) gets longer which narrows the field of view. Since that field of view is getting smaller, but being recorded on the same size media (the sensor doesnt change size, the film doesnt change size, etc...), that smaller field of view will look like you had magnified the image?? So a 50mm may have a Field of View covering 12 ft at 100y area visible to the sensor(yeah, I know, inaccurate.. working concept, not for accuacy atm), a 100mm may only have 6 ft visible to the sensor and a 300 may only have 1 ft (I know its not that simple, and again, I know its not constricted for field of view with those FL)?

Yes

I guess my hangup on trying to wrap my head around this is the only optics I'm used to are rifle scopes. You can have a fixed power 4x scope.. things at 100y look 4x larger than with the naked eye... They dont give focal lengths though. I know some scopes rated at 4x have a larger fov than others, but then you're dealing with primary lenses, objective lenses, and other things that I dont think necissarily apply to a camera lens in the same way.

Correct

 

[Designer]

ok, so to over simplify this.. the FOV taking up the full frame will be smaller, so what I see in the pic will look larger than if I used a smaller focal length lens in the exact same conditions and position and distance from the object...

What does that do to the quality of the image? Will it intorduce noise or grain into my images? I've got a 200mm film camera lens that I think could be a total blast to play with using a remote shutter release and a tripod... the equivlent focal length would be.. what 1060ish with my tiny sensor (5.33-5.7 multiplication factor from what I can find on the net..)

Your calculated FOV may be physically larger than the sensor, so what you will get in a photograph is a PORTION of the FOV as calculated. Kind of like cutting a biscuit out of the center of a large circle of dough. As for the quality (IQ) that will depend greatly on the quality of the lens and the sensor, respectively.

 

[scythefwd]

ok, so to over simplify this.. the FOV taking up the full frame will be smaller, so what I see in the pic will look larger than if I used a smaller focal length lens in the exact same conditions and position and distance from the object...

What does that do to the quality of the image? Will it intorduce noise or grain into my images? I've got a 200mm film camera lens that I think could be a total blast to play with using a remote shutter release and a tripod... the equivlent focal length would be.. what 1060ish with my tiny sensor (5.33-5.7 multiplication factor from what I can find on the net..)

Your calculated FOV may be physically larger than the sensor, so what you will get in a photograph is a PORTION of the FOV as calculated. Kind of like cutting a biscuit out of the center of a large circle of dough. As for the quality (IQ) that will depend greatly on the quality of the lens and the sensor, respectively.

Much appreciated folks. Crop factor is what you're talking about correct Designer? Good news, if its being cropped, its cropped around the edge and the lenses should be at their best in the center where my sensor would be looking .. possibly less light fall off at the edges (darkening around the perimiter of the image.. starts with a V, but I'm brain farting on the actual term... I recognize it but its not part of my lexicon yet).

I dont think the old Minolta Rokkor+ lenses were consered poor (thought they were pretty well reguarded for manual focus/stop lenses)

 

[Designer]

Also correct.

The term is "vignetting". Vignetting occurs when a lens that has a smaller FOV is paired with a camera with a larger sensor. Doing it the other way around there is no vignetting, and yes, for most lenses the IQ will be better nearer to the middle.

Lens-making technology has progressed since your older lenses were designed and built.

 

[scythefwd]

I dont doubt that they're being made better now. I just heard they're still considered good (maybe not great, but good) lenses.

What is a "fast" lens? Looking over on the rokkorfiles, they reference my 200mm f2.8 as a fast lens, even by todays standards (almost a direct quote).

 

[Designer]

Your Minolta and Rokkor lenses were good then and still good now, just not as advanced as one of more recent manufacture.

"Fast" means a wider maximum aperture. Usually the threshold for under 200mm is 2.8 to be considered fast, but it's all relative. Faster yet would be a 50 mm 1.8, but "fast" in a long focal length would be very expensive.

 

[scythefwd]

Both my lenses have variable stops on them... how would I know what they are rated at? I see reviews listing lenses as "200mm f/2.8 MD Tele Rokkor " (the only review I can find for a rokkor 200mm lens)... But if that IS my lens, why list it as only a f2.8 when its got several stop settings on it? Do the just list the widest open stop available on the lens? Even the pics in that specific review I copied the text from shows variable stops.

I just re-read.. max stop is what you mentioned... yay for reading lol.

http://www.rokkorfiles.com/200mm.htm this is the lens I have (well, my big one, not sure which is my 50 off the top of my head)

 

[scythefwd]

Some of the pics I've taken with the native lens so far

Found the varying different lighting conditions a challenge. All these were shot fully manual, but I was still learning how to read the light metering on the display (when I could see it on the screen.. the pentax only has the LCD and direct sunlight isn't great for reading)

 

[visualsbyab7]

awesome snaps

Visuals by Abbi is a Professional in photography