Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Pictures taken with SOOKY-M
From: Chris Bitmead <chrisb@ans.com.au>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 03:03:14 +0000

>      Martin V. Howard wrote:
> 
>      >>The problem with "nosus humungus" is not that the nose is big, but
>      rather that it is *disproportionally* large (in relationship to the
>      rest of the face).  Consequently, a nose ought to be more
>      disproportionally large with a 35mm from 19 inches away, than with a
>      50mm near-focus from 19 inches away.  Right?<<

Sorry not right. If film had infinite grain all you would need is
a 14mm lens and appropriate cropping at printing time.

>      Sounds reasonable to me (but I'm no optical expert)!  But on a related
>      topic, I recently read (in a Leica catalog, I think) that a 50mm lens
>      most closely approximates the "angle of view" of the human eye (which
>      I guess refers to the 50mm lens's 45 degree angle of view); yet I also
>      recall reading years ago that what human eyes see as the relationship
>      among objects, near to far, is approximated by an 85mm lens.  Can any
>      LUG member who HAS some optical expertise confirm that latter notion?

This is my opinion on the whole "what is a normal lens" and "what
lens has the same angle as a human eye" issue.

http://www.ans.com.au/~chrisb/photo/technical/normal.html

- -- 
Chris Bitmead
http://www.ans.com.au/~chrisb
mailto:chrisb@ans.com.au