Field of View in Relation to Sensor Sizes

[Kholi]

No 35mm Adapter to mess about with. So let's talk FOV

http://rebelsguide.com/dl/sensorSizes_06_cheatSheet.png (ty to original poster)

The D90 and RED are pretty close to each other. More of'a S35mm FOV in regards to the Nikon's video but...

What about the massive FOV of the 5D and beyond? Do we need to adopt to using more telephoto lenses to simulate 35mm or Academy FOV?

Discuss!

[John Caballero]

?????

[Matthew Bennett]

The DVX sensor is basically a pixel on that chart....ha! which boggles me 'cause my Andromeda stlll outputs finely resolved, 4:4:4 720p.

The 5D is a Huuge CHip!

[Thebes]

Just stop down an extra stop. Both the D90 and 5D have excellent low light performance. Using a lens with equivalent field of view on the 5D should mean it has roughly 1 stop shallower DOF than D90 or Super 35.

[Kholi]

What are you guys talking about?

I'm talking about Field of View, not Depth of Field.

[beckspace]

For each sensor format "tele" means something different for the same focal length

A 50mm on a D90 would be a tele, on a 5D it would be a normal lens

Then a normal lens for D90 would be 30~40mm, wide angle at 11~18mm (on 5D 25~18 mm)

wikipedia has an example of FOV (super35mm vs Full frame) with the same focal length

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Crop_Factor.JPG

[Kholi]

I'm thinkin' the widest lens you would have on a 5D would be something like a 20. Which is kinda cool.

[NikonGuy]

I'm thinkin' the widest lens you would have on a 5D would be something like a 20. Which is kinda cool.

All the way down to 14mm is pretty common. Nikon has made a 14mm prime for years and the excellent 14-24mm is very popular for D3/D700 users. But 14mm on a full frame is pretty wide, it's like a 9mm lens on APS-C sensor like the D90.

Oh and, Canon has 1.6 and 1.3 crops, while Nikon uses 1.5 when you calculate focal lengths.

[Kholi]

Well, in respect to larger sensors for filmmaking or commercial I think the widest may just be about a 17 - 20. Which should be, I think, as wide as a 14mm

[beckspace]

most photographic lens always were build for 35mm Full frame (as 5D or Nikon's D3) for over a century until digital cams born (of course, I'm not including large formats)

50mm is what Leica calculated as closer to our eyes "optics" in 35mm photography

The smaller sensors in digital photography made lens much more expensive to reach Normal or Wide FOV,

to have a Full frame Normal lens is comparative cheaper, a beautiful nikkor 50mm prime 1.8 is about $100 bucks and would give you the Academy FOV and more sharpness than the sensor can handle (for a future D3 that would shoot 2K, 4K)

In the same way is cheaper to have teles for smaller sensors

We should call the super35mm format as Half-Frame. times have change and using the full frame movie negative as "35mm" nowadays is kind of confusing. In the same way to call the photographic 35mm (or Nikon FX) as Vistavision frame

and who da hell uses Vistavision? (besides Fernando Meirelles)

We now have hybrid cams, and yet we use different nomenclature for movies and photo sensors.

[Kholi]

Nobody uses Vistavision. LoL. That's the issue. It's so large and looks so inappropriate to me. I'm all for some full frame goodness, considering resolution and low light advantages but how do we get beyond being stuck with Vistavision grossness?

With the HVX + Ultimate combo it was as easy as measuring and zooming in. Any thoughts aside from the obvious, which would be choosing lenses and approximating FOV between Full Frame/Vistavision and Academy?