For crop frame users...

[TonysTouch]

When you look at focal length, do you think in the len's focal length or the cropped focal length? I know when I use my 55-300mm, I think of it as just that and not 82.5-450mm.

 

[SCraig]

I just worry about what's printed on the lens.

 

[pgriz]

When using my crop camera, the thought "if I had a full-frame, the angle on this would be different", doesn't enter the mind. It's "does the lens give me the angle I need/want to see?". If it doesn't, I change lenses.

 

[usayit]

I still think in terms crop focal length...

Years and years of shooting film has ingrained it in my head that I can pre-visualize what I want.... then I still need to "translate". I also have 2x, 1.3x, and FF cameras.... so its natural to "translate" into a common "language" so to speak...

If you shoot with only 1 or 2 focal lengths for long periods of time..... learn them... its a lot harder to "unlearn". Part of the reason why I went FF to begin with... so that I can use my lenses as they were intended.

 

[pixmedic1 1]

crop frame does not change the focal length. it changes the field of view. that 55-300 is still 55-300 no matter what camera you put it on.
it would make a difference if you put a DX lens on a FX body, but just in terms of field of view, not actual focal length.
If you mean, do I look at the focal length of a lens and think about what the equivalent field of view would be DX vs FX then no, I personally don't, unless im picking up used glass and its an FX lens for my DX body. then maybe I might.. but i doubt it. if i want that range, im just going to buy it.

 

[usayit]

pixmedic,

I think they know that... wasn't the OP's question.

English is English

and

Spanish is Spanish


I have friends who are native Spanish speaks who think first in Spanish before responding in English. The OP's question was more along the lines of a person's "thought process".

 

[pixmedic1 1]

pixmedic,

I think they know that... wasn't the OP's question.

English is English

and

Spanish is Spanish


I have friends who are native Spanish speaks who think first in Spanish before responding in English. The OP's question was more along the lines of a person's "thought process".

yea, I amended my post. apparently MY thought process was a little slow to focus.

 

[pixmedic1 1]

I'll tell you what I DO sometimes think about when looking at lenses...
I sometimes calculate the focal range with a 1.4 and 2x teleconverter. not that I use them very often, but sometimes I just want to know what my options will be with them.

 

[480sparky43 43]

I own the 10-24 and 18-105. I think of them as 10 to 24mm and 18 to 105mm.

Since my 70-300 is an FX lens, I refer to it as 70 to 300m.

My 10.5 DX-format fisheye is still 10.5mm.

 

[TheBiles]

When I shot crop, I always referred to them as their proper focal length in conversation, but I always thought of them as their effective focal length. Even though a 50mm lens is always 50mm, it's completely different on a crop, and it doesn't make sense to think of that as "50mm."

Sent from my Galaxy S III

 

[Dao]

When you look at focal length, do you think in the len's focal length or the cropped focal length? I know when I use my 55-300mm, I think of it as just that and not 82.5-450mm.

Are you used to the field of view of full frame or 35mm film format? If not, do not worry about the crop factor at all. A lot of new users often think that way and tell others about how the lens behave. In fact it really mean nothing for someone that never user a 35mm film nor full film camera. The crop factor is for comparison. If you do not have anything to compare to then what you need to do is just look at the view finder and feel what 55mm focal length looks like and what 300mm focal length looks like.

Let me put it this way, you ask someone about how this food taste like, and he said it taste like chicken. It only make sense to you if you know how chicken taste like.

 

[fjrabon]

I think of it as a crop of the middle. ie I think of a 35mm lens on a crop frame as a 35 mm lens with the outside cropped off.

That's the thing I don't think most people who 'use DX for the reach' realize. That you can get that same exact reach on an FX, using the same exact lens (as long as the lens can be used on FX), simply by doing a DX crop on your FX shots. You dont actually get more reach by using DX, you're just forced to pre-crop everything. That 'extra reach' is nothing that a batch crop couldn't do in post.

Now, since I have actually shot more crop frame than full frame, when I use an FX, I actually tend to visualize the crop frame shot, but with extra frame around the edges.

 

[rexbobcat]

Yes. 24mm on a 1.6x crop makes an incredible difference.

 

[TonysTouch]

You dont actually get more reach by using DX, you're just forced to pre-crop everything. That 'extra reach' is nothing that a batch crop couldn't do in post.

But only if you have a FF camera with enough megapixels to compensate. If you shoot with a D4 in DX crop, you are not going to get the resolution of the same shot with a D7000.

 

[fjrabon]

You dont actually get more reach by using DX, you're just forced to pre-crop everything. That 'extra reach' is nothing that a batch crop couldn't do in post.

But only if you have a FF camera with enough megapixels to compensate. If you shoot with a D4 in DX crop, you are not going to get the resolution of the same shot with a D7000.

The 1.5 crop from FX to DX isn't large enough to notice the difference in resolution, IMHO. the D4 is 16.2 MP, so the 33% reduction in MP to go to a DX conversion still leaves you with 11 MP, which I don't think is particularly noticeable. Especially considering the other IQ benefits that D4 has going for it. I'd be willing to bet you'd be very hard pressed to tell the difference between full size images shot with a D7000 v. a D4 in crop mode from a resolution standpoint.