Ann, Here's a couple of tables and graphical representation of Field of View between 35mm and your Canon 300D (1.6x crop sensor):
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/Canon300D-35mm-FoV.jpg At the top left, you have a table of FoVs - H, V, Diagonal - sorted by degrees. At the top right, you have a table of 35mm vs Canon 300D focal length equivalents. At the bottom, you have a chart which maps FoV in diagonal degrees (vertical axis) against focal length (horizontal axis). I've marked a 35mm focal length and extended the field of view for both formats to the scale on the left, green lines. Hopefully that will be of some use to you... Depth of Field changes also, consider that you have about 1 stop more depth of field for each Field of View with the Canon 300D as a rough rule of thumb. Godfrey On Oct 2, 2007, at 4:50 PM, ann sanfedele wrote: > notice how I cleverly avoided mentioning my little bastard camera... > > but seriously, folks - It took me a few beats too long to realize > that a > 28mm smc Pentax lens on a > 35 mm digital camera changes it to a less wide lens -- and, I'm > guessing, the bit of space between the > back of the lens and the camera itself, due to the thickness of the > adaptor also contributes to this. > > Soooo is there a chart somewhere or a formula that says 28 becomes > 50(?) etc ??? > Does the difference/ proportion increase with the physical length > of the > lens? > > My 100mm macro seems like a 200 mm lens - so I'm really in pig > heaven.... > > It seems like the 28 mm still has the same depth of field given any > given aperature when it is > on the KX or the digital camera.... > > ann the curious -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
