Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (
More info?)
"Jim" <j.n@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:WvFPe.2792$eQ.678@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Scott Gardner" <gardners14@cox.net> wrote in message
> news
![:o :o]()
b8ug1lhfom3vvb6rccqetqjlhmmk96lsj@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:02:34 +1000, "Mike Warren"
>> <miwa-not-this-bit@or-this-cairnscarsound.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>Scott Gardner wrote:
>>>> I currently have a Nikon N55 (film), and I'm about to upgrade to a
>>>> Nikon D50 digital. I already have several lenses for the N55 that I
>>>> know will work with the D50, so I'm planning on just buying the D50
>>>> body and re-using my current lenses.
>>>>
>>>> I'm confused about the "magnification factor" of the D50, though. I
>>>> know that the D50 has a 1.5X magnification factor, so my old 200mm
>>>> lens will behave like a 300mm lens, and my 14mm will act like a 21mm.
>>>> What I'm unsure of is how I'll need to frame my shots. With the old
>>>> lenses on the new camera, will a portion of what I see through the
>>>> viewfinder be lost, or will the image I see through the viewfinder
>>>> still accurately depict what will be recorded?
>>>
>>>The vewfinder will show you what you will get in the final picture.
>>>About 95% of it anyway.
>>>
>>>-Mike
>>>
>> Thanks - so if I were to stand in one spot and frame a scene with the
>> old camera and 200mm lens, and then swap the lens over to the new
>> camera, the magnification will be evident in the viewfinder, and not
>> just in the final photograph?
>>
>> That's what I was hoping - that I could continue to use my old lenses
>> without having to mentally crop out a significant portion of the view
>> through the viewfinder.
>>
> Don't think magnification; think crop.
No. Don't think crop, think magnification. That's what it is. Nothing is
being cropped.
> A dSLR crops the image formed by the lens to the size of the sensor. As
> the size of the sensor on a D50 is smaller than the size of a 35mm frame,
> the lens image is cropped to fit. Hence, the angle of view on a dSLR is
> smaller. The image size on the sensor using any lens corresponds to the
> image size on a 35mm frame of a lens with 1.5 the focal length.
In other words, it's magnified 1.5 times, which is what he said in the first
place. The 200mm lens becomes *effectively* a 300mm lens because of the 1.5x
magnification factor.
We are all accustomed to think of focal length in 35mm terms. Everyone
understands this. Camera makers, periodicals, reviewers all provide 35mm
equivalents for focal lengths, and rightly so, since the actual focal
lengths are relatively meaningless--and will be as long as there are so many
different sensor sizes used.
Nothing is being cropped by the camera--unless some feature such as aspect
ratio modification is employed, which is not the usual thing, and then the
crop is very minor anyway. It makes no more sense to say the smaller sensor
is "cropping" anything than it would to say a 4x5 view camera is "cropping"
when it uses a lens which would also work on an 8x10 camera. In fact, many
lenses today designed specifically for digital SLRs only have a useful image
circle sized for those cameras. Does it make any sense at all to say a
camera is "cropping" something when it's using the full image size the lens
is capable of? (Rhetorical question.)
N.