1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

FOV question.

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by inmyeye, May 4, 2010.

  1. inmyeye

    inmyeye Mu-43 Regular

    77
    Feb 27, 2010
    Chicago-USA
    I guess this question can go here. Hopefully this question won't sound to asinine. I've always been a wide angle guy. I spent my life shooting with film rangefinders and using 21mm, 28mm, and 35mm lenses 99% of the time. About the most "normal" lens I have used consistently over the years would be the Minolta 58/1.4 MC Rokkor on my SRT101.


    OK, that being said, I am considering a lens for my E-P2 that will give me a little more reach. Mostly I am shooting street and documentary stuff and I'd like a lens that will give me a little more reach when it comes to those "skittish" subjects. I don't have a zoom lens to use for comparison, so I thought I would reach out and see if anyone here can give me some ideas.


    I'm not the kind of guy who is comfortable standing a block away and taking photographs, so I'm thinking a lens that would allow me to recreate that 35mm FOV look but from a little further back. Say, approx. 30-35ft.-40ft. tops. Not portraits mind you, but street shots. That leads me (finally :smile:) to my question. 70mm FOV? 80mm FOV? 90mm FOV? I'm concerned 90 might be too much.


    Any help, suggestions is greatly appreciated.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    You're not going to get a wide angle 'look' with a longer focal length lens. You might get the same coverage from further away, but the longer lens will 'compress' things a lot more. That said, longer lenses can be very effective, as they give you some stand off and can allow much better image isolation than you can get with a wide angle, even when using a slow lens.

    I also like using wide lenses, but also longer lenses, as I've found out since owning the Pen. I've been very surprised at how much I like to use my 90mm f4 lens, even though the effective field of view is equivalent to that of a 180mm lens on 35mm. My next widest down from the 90mm is a 50mm and that seems to sit in somewhat of a limbo in normal use. I also like using my 135mm f4 for some reason.

    I think it's all horses for courses and the best thing would be to try out a few focal lengths if you can, to see what suits you.

    Cheers

    Ray
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. cosinaphile

    cosinaphile Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 26, 2009
    new york city
    it sounds like the 17 2.8 pancake oly af lens is what you are after it give a fov similar to what you would have experenced with a 35mm lens [its actually about 34mm equiv]
    if its a manual lens you seek then either an 18mm pentax auto 110 with adapter [you will only have 2.8 no other aperture] plus pentax 110 to m4\3 adapter or something like the a 15 mm 4.5 which would seem like a 30 mm voigtlander and has tremendous depth of field
    a 20mm lens on your m4\3 camera gives a fov like a 40 on film a 50mm = 100mm fov etc

    i think a 50 mm might suit your needs
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    If you still have your 28 and 35 RF lenses it might be worth giving them a try - they will give you 56 and 70 FOV

    My current personal fav is a 24/2 OM lens which gives me a 48 FOV

    In this flickr set you will find shots taken with 24, 28, 35 and other focal lengths

    Legacy lenses - a set on Flickr

    K
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. tam

    tam Mu-43 Regular

    107
    Apr 12, 2010
    So you want a 35mm FOV, but from what sort of range are you comparing the FOV? That makes little sense... and do you mean 35mm on a full-frame or a 4/3?

    Anyhow, as despite the confusion I think I have a rough idea what you're after, attached is a (not great) pic of a butcher.

    It was taken using a 50/2 Nikkor, from across the street (maybe 20-30 feet?) - which sounds like it might be about what you were after?
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 2
  6. Bokeh Diem

    Bokeh Diem Mu-43 Top Veteran

    655
    Mar 14, 2010
    Toronto
    Nice shot Tam. I thought at first it was a ballet lift in a modern piece. It really shows off the lens' capabilities.

    Yep, I think those 40-50 legacy primes would be just the ticket, and fast too.

    Their speed, and their extraordinary crispness, makes them versatile when it comes to cropping, as per attached.

    Bokeh D

    Car_1090163_1024-Cropped.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. inmyeye

    inmyeye Mu-43 Regular

    77
    Feb 27, 2010
    Chicago-USA
    Thanks to everyone. OzRay, you're right. I will have to just try some different focal lengths and see what appeals to me. Cosinaphile, thank you. I already use the m.zuiko 17/2.8 lens. kevinparis, thank you also. i will take a look at those photos. Tam, thank you. It seems I have confused you. I still think in terms of 35mm film focal lengths. When I said 35mm FOV, I said from 30-35ft. distance and I mean full-frame. As OzRay said a longer focal length will compress things a bit. When I stated 70, 80 and 90mm I meant in 4/3 terms. (so, 35mm, 40mm, and 45mm) I hope that clears it up. By the way, your photo is actually a big help. If I am not mistaken a 50/2 Nikkor is giving you the 4/3 equiv. 100mm FOV. Taken from 20-30 feet distance it gives me a good starting pont.
     
  8. tam

    tam Mu-43 Regular

    107
    Apr 12, 2010
    It'd have been a better shot when he was facing me. Thing is, I came round the corner and spotted him but as this was the first time with the MF Nikkor on was a bit of a rush to get the aperture and focus set. Though I have to say, there is a certain joy in using a nice old MF lens when you can take your time and get it just so. This one was a case of "F8, that'll do, looks about 30 feet...good enough" :)

    Anyway, I digress - to the OP, do you want a lens wider or more tele than this example? I chose it as it's a street scene, with enough space for a few people, shot from about the distance you wanted.

    However if you were more wanting a shot of just the butcher, in this case, my 135 would've been a better bet.

    EDIT: yes, 50mm is same FOV as 100mm on 35mm film.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    inmyeye

    think most of the images are tagged or commented with the focal length of the legacy lens.

    some were shot on a 4/3 camera as opposed to a micro 4/3 but that doesn't change the effect.

    I do tend to crop my shots but not by much

    any further questions don't hesitate

    K
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. inmyeye

    inmyeye Mu-43 Regular

    77
    Feb 27, 2010
    Chicago-USA
    Thanks Tam. Really, your photo is a great example. I thank you for the consideration. I think I would want wider and in that respect it shows me that 100mm FOV is a little too tight. I'm thinking 90mm FOV would be better. Sorry for the confusion.


    Kevin, thank you also. I went and looked at your photos and I like them alot. Actually I like the ones taken with the 35 cron the best. I can see that 100mm FOV is too tight for me, I suppose it comes down to 80mm or 90mm (40-45mm) I'm considering a Minolta MD 45/2 Rokkor-X. I've been seeing some really fine specimens on E-Bay for a song.
     
  11. cosinaphile

    cosinaphile Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 26, 2009
    new york city

    i think in terms of 35mm too, i believe many do here as well , and it seems that its even becoming convention with the 35mm equiv focal l being printed on some point and shoot zooms