Thanks Cotty and Henning - I'm pretty much following you - been chewing on it. Forgive me, this is the first time I've really tried to get a grip on this question. I think I do understand what is discussed in Mike's article.
Let me rephrase the question: in 35mm format my favorite w/a is 24mm, not just because I like the FOV, but also because for me it's the widest lens that still looks "normal" - wider lenses seem to me to call attention to themselves as sort of "special effect" lenses. I think even in a rectilinear lens, there's a lot of keystoning, pincushion and various other linear alterations. Maybe "distortion" is the wrong word. So, on a 1.6 format camera, to get the same FOV as a 24mm I need to use a 15mm lens, but on a 35mm camera a 15mm lens is practically a fisheye. If I take a photo in 35mm with that lens and then crop it in PS by 1.6, those stretched lines are still evident. Therefore what I'm understanding - and help me out here - is that the same thing is going to happen on a 1.6 DSLR, that 15mm lens is still going to be a 15mm lens with all its innate characteristics, and the only way I'm going to get a photo similar to the one I take with a 24mm on my 35mm is with a FF DSLR. AND, if that's true, is all of the above also true with lenses whose image circle has been adjusted for the small sensor, as in EF-S lenses? Thanks for bearing with me here. Ken * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
