On Aug 27, 2006, at 1:30 PM, Ryan Brooks wrote: > It appears to be a crop of a wide angle lens, which it is. > > In particular, informal head and shoulders shots look a bit odd if I'm > close to the subject. The shoulder may seem enlarged if I'm taking a > profile, for example. Whereas a 50mm would compress this distance > more. > > I thought I would be at home with the 31mm limited on the D, but > using a > wide angle lens to achieve a normal-length crop is a bit wonky to > me. I > still like it, I wish I was using a 50mm focal length instead of a > 31mm > lens cropped.
??? I don't know how you can tell the difference. The lenses' rendering qualities might be slightly different with respect to out of focus elements and rectilinear correction, but with regard to field of view and perspective: if the field of view is the same, the perspective will look the same. A 31mm field of view on the *ist D is not equivalent to a 50mm field of view on 24x36mm format, for that you need a 35mm lens on the *ist D for the closest match. I don't have a 35mm film body to do a direct comparison myself, but looking at my older 35mm film work with 50mm lenses and comparing them to the *ist DS fitted with a 35mm f/2 lens, there is *no* difference in field of view of any significance and the perspective is identical. Please post a pair of photographs that illustrate what you're seeing. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
