On Fri, 22 Dec 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
No, the distances aren't precise, but I can get a more accurate idea the
next time I drive past the scene. I think I'll put the Lufkin in the Domke
on my way out later t'nite.
How about a FF body with the 18mm on it? If it works you know what you
I think you need the angle of view more than field of view. the formula
for AOV is
AOF = 2*tan^(-1)/(F/2*f) where F is the size of the sensor f is the
focal length. You'll have to use some algebra to rearrange the terms to
solve for f. I'm just feeling too lazy...
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
On 12/24/06, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you need the angle of view more than field of view. the formula
for AOV is
AOF = 2*tan^(-1)/(F/2*f) where F is the size of the sensor f is the
focal length. You'll have to use some algebra to rearrange the terms to
solve for f.
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Savage
Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 9:28 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Determining a Focal Length
On 12/24/06, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you need the angle of view more than
There is a photo I'd like to make, but the widest lens I have is still too
long as it forces me to include an undesirable object in the frame and I
don't want to mess around with cloning the object out of the scene. I will
need to borrow a wider lens, but I don't know what focal length would
On 23/12/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a photo I'd like to make, but the widest lens I have is still too
long as it forces me to include an undesirable object in the frame and I
don't want to mess around with cloning the object out of the scene. I will
need to borrow a
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Shel Belinkoff
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 3:53 PM
To: PDML
Subject: Determining a Focal Length
There is a photo I'd like to make, but the widest lens I have is still
too long as it forces me to include an undesirable object
On 23/12/06, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Basic trigonometry. God, even the numbers
are the easiest possible to calculate
(dont even need a calculator for that
baby). You need a 90 degree
lens horizontally to just cover
the object. The way to calculate f.l.
is to use same ratios
Smacking forehead! I've got f-calc on this machine. Thanks for the
reminder.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Digital Image Studio
Is there a way to determine the focal
length I need based on the subject
distance and framing I want using
the longer lens. I know how close
I
On 23/12/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Smacking forehead! I've got f-calc on this machine. Thanks for the
reminder.
I've got another handy one for you:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/depth_of_field_calc.html
--
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel
And the DA 14/2.8.
Paul
On Dec 22, 2006, at 6:58 PM, John Francis wrote:
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 12:53:26PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
There is a photo I'd like to make, but the widest lens I have is
still too
long as it forces me to include an undesirable object in the frame
and I
Oops :-)
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 07:01:13PM -0500, Paul Stenquist wrote:
And the DA 14/2.8.
Paul
On Dec 22, 2006, at 6:58 PM, John Francis wrote:
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 12:53:26PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
There is a photo I'd like to make, but the widest lens I have is
still
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 12:53:26PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
There is a photo I'd like to make, but the widest lens I have is still too
long as it forces me to include an undesirable object in the frame and I
don't want to mess around with cloning the object out of the scene. I will
need
: Re: Determining a Focal Length
And the DA 14/2.8.
Paul
On Dec 22, 2006, at 6:58 PM, John Francis wrote:
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 12:53:26PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
There is a photo I'd like to make, but the widest lens I have is
still too
long as it forces me to include an undesirable
of view, because they arent.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Digital Image Studio
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 4:51 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Determining a Focal Length
On 23/12/06, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED
On 23/12/06, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nope, what you gave was impossible.
18mm and 15mm are not possible (the
lengths you provided) because
Pentax APS always needs a lens 2/3 the length
of FF 35mm for same angle of view. I dont care what calculator
you used, it's wrong if it
Hi John,
No, the distances aren't precise, but I can get a more accurate idea the
next time I drive past the scene. I think I'll put the Lufkin in the Domke
on my way out later t'nite.
There's also the DA 14/2.8 which, along with the 12-24, seems like the best
option. Congrats on the 12-24 ...
you get that short.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Shel Belinkoff
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 7:52 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Determining a Focal Length
Hi John,
No, the distances aren't precise, but I can get
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Determining a Focal Length
For what it's worth, the subject is about 12-feet long and I have to get
about six feet from it.
Presuming you want to use the DSLR, you will need either the 10-17 fish-eye
or possibly the 12-24 might
19 matches
Mail list logo
