Smoking or no smoking - comments please

[TobiasV]

Post from my Latest shoot... wanted to share...

Using my new 35mm f1.8 that works out to a 52mm crop on my D7000... first time with new lens... any tips on 50mm shooting?

 

[o hey tyler]

Post from my Latest shoot... wanted to share...

Using my new 35mm f1.8 that works out to a 52mm crop on my D7000... first time with new lens... any tips on 50mm shooting?

View attachment 42841

The first tip would be to not think of it as a 50mm lens. That's only your effective FoV on a full frame camera. A 50mm lens would lend much more to subject isolation than a 35mm on an APS-C sensor. Until you shoot on a 35mm sensor/film in addition to your crop body, thinking of your lens as a 50mm lens is useless, and more confusing than it needs to be.

Pretty much the only thing the effective FoV is useful for is keeping a 1/focal length shutter speed. So you'd want to be at least at 1/50s when shooting with that lens handheld. With a 35mm lens on a gripped full frame body, I can get away with a 1/30s shutter speed and be pretty stable. Sometimes slower if need be. You might find that you're able to do the same.

 

[kathyt]

Not really feeling this one. Sorry. The shadows and lines are really distracting, and the cig is blah!

 

[Rick50]

That bottom shadow kills it for me. Cig is ok to me even though I don't smoke anymore.

 

[Josh66]

I was under the impression that there would also be one of her not smoking to compare this to...? HAHA - I guess not.

Her smoking doesn't bother me. I kinda like the way the light fell on (mostly) just her face.

 

[tirediron]

Hmmm.... I actually think I rather like this. I would suggest rotating it so that the bottom shadow is truly horizontal however.

 

[TobiasV]

LOLz, this was never about her smoking or not smoking.... just had to pick a topic for the post..... should have made it... first shoot with Nikon 35mm F1.8 ... comments, hints and tips please

Then people wouldn't get so hung up on the smoking thing...

ps... this is smoking ...



all shot as part of my "50mm" test day - Creatography Labs ? Early Morning 50 mm

 

[o hey tyler]

LOLz, this was never about her smoking or not smoking.... just had to pick a topic for the post..... should have made it... first shoot with Nikon 35mm F1.8 ... comments, hints and tips please

Then people wouldn't get so hung up on the smoking thing...

ps... this is smoking ...

<img src="http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=42908"/>

all shot as part of my "50mm" test day - Creatography Labs ? Early Morning 50 mm

It's still not a 50mm.

Unless you're talking about an actual 50mm lens, and not the effective FoV of your 35mm.

 

[duhast]

The first tip would be to not think of it as a 50mm lens. That's only your effective FoV on a full frame camera. A 50mm lens would lend much more to subject isolation than a 35mm on an APS-C sensor. Until you shoot on a 35mm sensor/film in addition to your crop body, thinking of your lens as a 50mm lens is useless, and more confusing than it needs to be.

Not to hijack, but could 'splain me, Lucy, on that statement? I learned photo on a 35mm film camera, and the whole 1.6 crop thing has left me vague how to think about my lenses. Are you saying I shouldn't think in terms of my 18-55 lens as a 28-88 on my old Minolta 35mm film camera?

 

[TobiasV]

duhast meigh thread hijacken -- there are propably 1000000's of posts about this... google anyone?

File:Sensor sizes overlaid inside.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like Charley Brown would say... Good Grief....

 

[duhast]

duhast meigh thread hijacken -- there are propably 1000000's of posts about this... google anyone?

File:Sensor sizes overlaid inside.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like Charley Brown would say... Good Grief....

You misunderstand. I get the whole crop thing/sensor size. But if there is a crop ratio, such as the 1.6 we're talking about, then why is 18mm on a crop sensor NOT like a 28.8 lens on a full frame 35mm camera? Why should I NOT think of it in those terms, the terms I am used to relating to from my film days? Or am I reading tyler's post wrong, 'Charley Brown' not withstanding...?

 

[o hey tyler]

You misunderstand. I get the whole crop thing/sensor size. But if there is a crop ratio, such as the 1.6 we're talking about, then why is 18mm on a crop sensor NOT like a 28.8 lens on a full frame 35mm camera? Why should I NOT think of it in those terms, the terms I am used to relating to from my film days? Or am I reading tyler's post wrong, 'Charley Brown' not withstanding...?

Read the part where I say "Until you shoot with a 35mm sensor/film..."

 

[duhast]

You misunderstand. I get the whole crop thing/sensor size. But if there is a crop ratio, such as the 1.6 we're talking about, then why is 18mm on a crop sensor NOT like a 28.8 lens on a full frame 35mm camera? Why should I NOT think of it in those terms, the terms I am used to relating to from my film days? Or am I reading tyler's post wrong, 'Charley Brown' not withstanding...?

Read the part where I say "Until you shoot with a 35mm sensor/film..."

(sigh...) Chalk up my slowness to age if you need to, but I'm really just looking for clarity rather than snark. OK...I'm a dumb old man, so then you are saying that I'm reading too much into, or not seeing clearly, your point and that there is nothing I'm not seeing, that it is perfectly valid for me to do the mental 'conversion' (if you will) and think of my 18-55 as a 35mm equivalent 28.8-88, correct?

 

[o hey tyler]

(sigh...) Chalk up my slowness to age if you need to, but I'm really just looking for clarity rather than snark. OK...I'm a dumb old man, so then you are saying that I'm reading too much into, or not seeing clearly, your point and that there is nothing I'm not seeing, that it is perfectly valid for me to do the mental 'conversion' (if you will) and think of my 18-55 as a 35mm equivalent 28.8-88, correct?

I got confused by the run on sentence. There was no snark involved, I just assumed you could have deduced this by reading that one part of my post.

What I'm saying is that if you have shot 35mm film or on a 35mm sensor, than doing the conversion may be helpful for you.

It doesn't "make" your 18-55 behave like a 28-whatever, it only represents your FoV.

So in the OPs case, where they've only shot an aps-c DSLR, it does them absolutely no good to get the impression that their 35mm lens is somehow a "50mm" because they have no frame of reference. It also doesn't behave or render space like a 50mm, it's simply only the FoV.

 

[duhast]

(sigh...) Chalk up my slowness to age if you need to, but I'm really just looking for clarity rather than snark. OK...I'm a dumb old man, so then you are saying that I'm reading too much into, or not seeing clearly, your point and that there is nothing I'm not seeing, that it is perfectly valid for me to do the mental 'conversion' (if you will) and think of my 18-55 as a 35mm equivalent 28.8-88, correct?

I got confused by the run on sentence. There was no snark involved, I just assumed you could have deduced this by reading that one part of my post.

What I'm saying is that if you have shot 35mm film or on a 35mm sensor, than doing the conversion may be helpful for you.

It doesn't "make" your 18-55 behave like a 28-whatever, it only represents your FoV.

So in the OPs case, where they've only shot an aps-c DSLR, it does them absolutely no good to get the impression that their 35mm lens is somehow a "50mm" because they have no frame of reference. It also doesn't behave or render space like a 50mm, it's simply only the FoV.

No harm, no foul. Thanks for clearing that up. Indeed, frame of reference. Now, for your last sentence, "It also doesn't behave or render space like a 50mm...", I assume you mean things like characteristics associated with focal length, such as DoF, lens distortions (wide vs Tele), etc?