an example and comparison of wide and tele effects

Didereaux

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Oct 29, 2013
Messages
2,372
Reaction score
1,587
Location
swamps of texas
Website
tinyurl.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
The following shots were made by my wife and I of the same train, nearly the same time. She was about 90-100' away using 100mm, and I was barely 20' and using a 24mm lens. Notice how the wide lens lengthened the body of the engine and enlarged the nearest portions. Whereas the 100mm compressed the length of the engine. Both shots are good I think, and neither has an advantage. So plan ahead as to how you want your subject to look then pick your focal length. The following quote is edited in (hopefully with the authors blessing)
Two different terms. The ONLY WAY to alter perspective is by changing the camera-to-subject distance. Distance, distance, distance!!!!!!!!

Apparent perspective distortion is another term. Often confused with perspective.

There are so many on-line and printed sources these days, and a large percentage of them are flat out using the term perspective in an improper, half-assed way. Perspective is an old term that has come to be widely misunderstood, even by people who know a lot about photography in a practical sense. As fellow TPF member Ysarex has mentioned, there are many myths and half-truths and inaccuracies that are perpetuated every day, on-line, and in books.

Correct use of actual terms that have been around for hundreds of years versus how to actually shoot images that have different feeling to them is the subject of this post, and we have seen this conversation pop up here every six months or so for literally the last seven years!

Be that as it may, I thought big D's post was a pretty good demonstration of what was once commonly called lenswork, a term that has sort of fallen out of common use. Petty good example photos, really, wonderful comparison between the size of the locomotive engineer in the tele shot as opposed to the wide-angle shot!

100mm
IMG_5150.jpg


24mm
old%25252028web-8205.jpg
 
Last edited:
Interesting comparison and a great inspiration to do some experimenting with different lenses on the same shot.
 
The following shots were made by my wife and I of the same train, nearly the same time. She was about 90-100' away using 100mm, and I was barely 20' and using a 24mm lens. Notice how the wide lens lengthened the body of the engine and enlarged the nearest portions. Whereas the 100mm compressed the length of the engine. Both shots are good I think, and neither has an advantage. So plan ahead as to how you want your subject to look then pick your focal length.

100mm


24mm

actually a wide or long focal length lens didn't result in lengthening or shortening that train or changing the "compression" !

it's all and completely about distance !
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)
 
Last edited:
The following shots were made by my wife and I of the same train, nearly the same time. She was about 90-100' away using 100mm, and I was barely 20' and using a 24mm lens. Notice how the wide lens lengthened the body of the engine and enlarged the nearest portions. Whereas the 100mm compressed the length of the engine. Both shots are good I think, and neither has an advantage. So plan ahead as to how you want your subject to look then pick your focal length.

100mm


24mm

actually it's not a wide or long lens that resulted in "compression"
it's all and completely about distance !
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)


Would you like to discuss Physics? Fine I am qualified to do that. If instead you would like to discuss photography then do so in photography terms. This is the beginners forum, not the Richard Feynman Forum.
 
The following shots were made by my wife and I of the same train, nearly the same time. She was about 90-100' away using 100mm, and I was barely 20' and using a 24mm lens. Notice how the wide lens lengthened the body of the engine and enlarged the nearest portions. Whereas the 100mm compressed the length of the engine. Both shots are good I think, and neither has an advantage. So plan ahead as to how you want your subject to look then pick your focal length.

100mm


24mm

actually it's not a wide or long lens that resulted in "compression"
it's all and completely about distance !
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)


Would you like to discuss Physics? Fine I am qualified to do that. If instead you would like to discuss photography then do so in photography terms. This is the beginners forum, not the Richard Feynman Forum.


huh?
perspective is all about distance not lens focal length!
(and yes, I know a little something about "physics" !
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)
 
The following shots were made by my wife and I of the same train, nearly the same time. She was about 90-100' away using 100mm, and I was barely 20' and using a 24mm lens. Notice how the wide lens lengthened the body of the engine and enlarged the nearest portions. Whereas the 100mm compressed the length of the engine. Both shots are good I think, and neither has an advantage. So plan ahead as to how you want your subject to look then pick your focal length.

100mm


24mm

actually it's not a wide or long lens that resulted in "compression"
it's all and completely about distance !
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)


Would you like to discuss Physics? Fine I am qualified to do that. If instead you would like to discuss photography then do so in photography terms. This is the beginners forum, not the Richard Feynman Forum.


huh?
perspective is all about distance not lens focal length!
(and yes, I know a little something about "physics" !
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)

You are trolling and I am not playing.
Don't bother responding you made my ignore list.
"Shoo go away kid, you bother me." - WC Fields
 
The following shots were made by my wife and I of the same train, nearly the same time. She was about 90-100' away using 100mm, and I was barely 20' and using a 24mm lens. Notice how the wide lens lengthened the body of the engine and enlarged the nearest portions. Whereas the 100mm compressed the length of the engine. Both shots are good I think, and neither has an advantage. So plan ahead as to how you want your subject to look then pick your focal length.

100mm


24mm

actually it's not a wide or long lens that resulted in "compression"
it's all and completely about distance !
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)


Would you like to discuss Physics? Fine I am qualified to do that. If instead you would like to discuss photography then do so in photography terms. This is the beginners forum, not the Richard Feynman Forum.


huh?
perspective is all about distance not lens focal length!
(and yes, I know a little something about "physics" !
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)

You are trolling and I am not playing.
Don't bother responding you made my ignore list.
"Shes

umm .... OK
But if you want to learn something it's not the lens focal length that shortened that train!
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)
 
beagle100 is right. The wide angle lens allows you to get much closer to an object while keeping it in frame. With a long telephoto lens, you have to stand much further away to keep it in frame. That distance flattens it. The closer you are to something the less flat or "compressed" it looks. If you stood right next to the front of the train, with just your naked eyes, you're going to have to tilt your head up and down to see the entire front of the train while rear of the train will seem much smaller in the frame which, in this case, is you eyes' field of vision. Then stand 100ft away and the size difference of the front and rear will look much less exaggerated, it'll look flattened. The focal length of your eyes hasn't changed, only the distance has.

Still, your photos do a good job showing how different focal lengths will affect your composition. I really like that first pic.
 
Last edited:
Didereaux is correct. Sorry Beagle & Tufopix.

Perspective is about the angle of view and that's strongly related to the focal length of the lens (as well as sensor size). A "wide" lens (relative to the "normal" focal length of the camera) will tend to stretch the sense of depth, make objects appear longer (if shot with a view from front to back as Didereaux's steam locomotive) and this does in fact result in the appearance that the engine is "longer" and that the cab at the back is a bit smaller (think about the rear-view mirror on the right-side of your car that says "objects in mirror are closer than they appear" -- that convex mirror is giving you a wide-angle perspective.) A "long" focal length does the opposite. The engine doesn't appear to be as long and the cab doesn't appear smaller as it did in the wide-angle view.

I realize you linked an article that claims the opposite. The author is misinformed. BTW, the author then goes on to show four images... and then explains that they "cropped" the images. But if you crop an image, it's analogous to changing the sensor size and THAT changes the perspective (remember that perspective is strongly tied to the true angle of view, which is based on a combination of focal length and sensor size.)

The author has managed to confuse themselves.
 
Didereaux is correct. Sorry Beagle & Tufopix.

Perspective is about the angle of view and that's strongly related to the focal length of the lens (as well as sensor size). .........

I disagree, at least to a point. A 4mm lens and a 4,000mm lens will have the exact same perspective when placed in the same position in relationship to the subject. What is missing is a change in the spatial relationship between using an über-wide and a super-telephoto. In order to frame the subject the same in the viewfinder, one must move the camera when switching lenses.

.....But if you crop an image, it's analogous to changing the sensor size and THAT changes the perspective (remember that perspective is strongly tied to the true angle of view, which is based on a combination of focal length and sensor size.)

Um....... no. Cropping merely changes the apparent field of view. It does nothing to change the perspective. At least until you move the camera.
 
these so remind me of my Uncle Jerry. He loved trains and photography. He would have just loved these. Thanks for sharing and reminding me how much my uncle meant to me.
 
Didereaux is correct. Sorry Beagle & Tufopix.

Perspective is about the angle of view and that's strongly related to the focal length of the lens (as well as sensor size). .........

I disagree, at least to a point. A 4mm lens and a 4,000mm lens will have the exact same perspective when placed in the same position in relationship to the subject. What is missing is a change in the spatial relationship between using an über-wide and a super-telephoto. In order to frame the subject the same in the viewfinder, one must move the camera when switching lenses.

If I place a camera on a tripod, then place the "subject" precisely 10' away and place a background (wall) 20' away (10' behind the subject) THEN I can take an image with lenses that have two different focal lengths. If I then "crop" the wider image so that the section of the image matches the "true field of view" captured by the longer lens, then (and only then) there is no difference.

But that's not what this image is about.

If I do not move the camera when shooting with the wider lens, my subject will appear smaller and farther away. If I compensate by moving my tripod nearer to the subject so that they fill the same area of the frame as when shot using the narrower lens (back at the original distance) then I'll notice the background area behind the subject will not be the same. Also, I may notice perspective distortion on my subject and the background will appear farther away.

A lens by itself does not have an angle of view. Only a lens/sensor combination has an angle of view.

.....But if you crop an image, it's analogous to changing the sensor size and THAT changes the perspective (remember that perspective is strongly tied to the true angle of view, which is based on a combination of focal length and sensor size.)

Um....... no. Cropping merely changes the apparent field of view. It does nothing to change the perspective. At least until you move the camera.

Cropping changes the angle of view. The only angle of view we have is the one in our image frame. If you crop it, you changed it. That's why an APS-C camera is referred to as a "crop-frame" camera because changing the sensor size is exactly the same as "cropping" the image from a larger sensor camera.

This is probably easier to explain using a telescope -- astronomers deal with this issue routinely, photographers never really deal with the concept of "true" vs. "apparent" field-of-view. The "true" field of view is whatever you get in your image (the area of the real world that you managed to capture in your image relative to the position of the camera). The "apparent" angle of view is the size the image appears to be in the viewfinder. I have, for example, a TeleVue 41mm Panoptic eyepiece with a 68º "apparent field of view" (AFOV). The "apparent" angle of view using that eyepiece is always 68º regardless of which scope I am using. But when you combine the eyepiece with a specific telescope (based on focal length of the scope) you get a "true angle of view" (TFOV). For example, in my 14" SCT (a focal length of a bit over 3500mm), the TFOV is approximately 45 arc-minutes (3/4º) even though the AFOV is 68º -- radically different values. What this means is that your eyeball has look 68º from edge to edge to see the image... but the true area of the sky in that image only represents 3/4º.
 
.....A lens by itself does not have an angle of view. Only a lens/sensor combination has an angle of view. .......

And any combination of lenses and sensors have no set distortion. I can shoot an Iphone and an 8x10 from the same spot, and both have the exact same perspective. I can toss in a P&S, a bridge camera, a 110 or 126 camera, a Pentax K1000, a Canon 5DMIII, a Mamiya C330, a Polariod SX-70, or a Tachihara. When all of them are shot from the same place, each will have the exact same perspective distortion on any subject in sight. Regardless of lens, regardless of cropping.

Once needs to change the spatial relationship between (any) camera (and any lens) and a subject to change perspective.
 
Didereaux is correct. Sorry Beagle & Tufopix.

Perspective is about the angle of view and that's strongly related to the focal length of the lens (as well as sensor size). A "wide" lens (relative to the "normal" focal length of the camera) will tend to stretch the sense of depth, make objects appear longer (if shot with a view from front to back as Didereaux's steam locomotive) and this does in fact result in the appearance that the engine is "longer" and that the cab at the back is a bit smaller (think about the rear-view mirror on the right-side of your car that says "objects in mirror are closer than they appear" -- that convex mirror is giving you a wide-angle perspective.) A "long" focal length does the opposite. The engine doesn't appear to be as long and the cab doesn't appear smaller as it did in the wide-angle view.

I realize you linked an article that claims the opposite. The author is misinformed. BTW, the author then goes on to show four images... and then explains that they "cropped" the images. But if you crop an image, it's analogous to changing the sensor size and THAT changes the perspective (remember that perspective is strongly tied to the true angle of view, which is based on a combination of focal length and sensor size.)

The author has managed to confuse themselves.

Tim you ought to know better!

The flattening effect of focal lengths is down to the relative distances. Take the case of two lined up subjects are 10' apart. That's a significant distance if the nearest is 5' away, as the other 15' three times further. Once the nearest is 100' away the second is only 10% further so the difference in distance is less significant. The confusion over focal length comes in because photographers like to fill the frame with their subject, choosing a longer focal length when they are further away.

If that's not enough you can set up a similar situation with 4 points on the ground in square layout and investigate the changes in angles between them at different distances. As you get further away all the angles become more similar. So distance is effecting the perspective. It makes no difference which focal length is used or how big you print it.

To prove this to yourself you can take two images of the same subject from the same position but at different focal lengths (play fair though don't use fish-eyes). Then print the wide angle shot bigger so the subject is the same size. The perspective in both will be the same. The extra FOV round the outside is irrelevant.
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top