/p/ - Photography » Thread #4197061

[20 / 2 / 12]

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 17:42:33 No.4197061 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>4197077 >>4197080 >>4197190 >>4197203 >>4198196

What's the worst focal length?

I think most under 50mm are dumb, but 35mm is sometimes useful. Wide angles are really quite stupid when you just think shit looks nice so you snap a picture of everything without actually thinking about what is nice.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 17:59:18 No.4197067 Report

Quoted By: >>4197079

Wide angle and supertelephoto primes are stupid for plebs because they are so niche and scene-specific that you will almost never use them properly. It's difficult to compose with, on one hand you need more of the world in front of you to be part of the scene, on the other hand you need to be far away enough to even have a scene.

This is why most of you should just get zooms like 16-35s and 70-200s. However, a wealthier photographer working very intentionally and controlling the scene with few limits or knowing exactly what he's going into can get a lot of mileage out of WA/UWA primes and supertelephoto primes, as has been done by countless professional portrait and sports photographers and even more numerous cinematographers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:00:44 No.4197070 Report

Quoted By:

It’s a toss up between 28 and 105

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:13:33 No.4197077 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197061
28mm aka the winocam cctv special

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:15:32 No.4197079 Report

Quoted By: >>4197083

>>4197067
Anon, when you hear a cinematographer uses a 50 or a 35, it's not in 8-perf pulldown (aka full frame equivalent) terms. It's in super 35 terms, aka APS-C equivalent.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:18:56 No.4197080 Report

Quoted By: >>4197087

>>4197061
8 mm, it's really a pain to compose with a fisheye lens unless the subject is a stadium or a lake.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:21:45 No.4197081 Report

Quoted By:

>wide angles are dumb
you guys.. never shoot indoors? I mean super wides i get are niche

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:27:08 No.4197083 Report

Quoted By: >>4197087 >>4197091 >>4197092 >>4198077 >>4198087

50mm.

It's a stupid focal length. when i still had a 24-70 f2.8 i spent most of my time approximating 35-40mm and 70mm was never long enough. i never ended up at 50mm. 24mm was rarely used but still somewhat useful in tight spaces for photos involving more than one person.

If someone makes a 35-85 f2.8 zoom i'll be happy.

>>4197079
>everyone in cinema shoots super 35!
No.
>inb4 i meant everyone i like
What were those, family films of dogs? Your crush on lassie's fluffy ass aside, cinematographers used the full frame and medium format film as well. The gordy forty really was a 40mm.

k/\HOH

k/\HOH Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:31:08 No.4197087 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197083
C.F.F.D. k3k

>>4197080
if a focal length isn't that useful just cover it with a zoom that reaches a more useful focal length so you don't lose it entirely

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:43:08 No.4197091 Report

Quoted By: >>4197099

>>4197083
>35-85 f2.8 zoom
This sounds pretty nice.

Why did manufacturers decide you are only allowed to have 24-70 anyway?

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO positiveprint.jpg, 74KiB, 900x281

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Thu 29 Jun 2023 18:43:18 No.4197092 Report

Quoted By: >>4197099

>>4197083
>cinematographers used the full frame and medium format film as well. The gordy forty really was a 40mm.
The full frame in cinema isn't 36x24mm, anon. The film runs vertically. If you want the cinema 40mm look on your 35mm full frame stills camera, you use a 60mm lens. 36x24 is a rarity that had a short life as VistaVision. Most of the movies shot in that format were made between 1954 and 1961. Being a die-hard Hitchcock fan I'm familiar with the format, his classic Vertigo was shot in it. Don't mistake your ignorance of technical aspects of photography for my personal preferences.
Pic related is VistaVision. It's not the standard by any means.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 19:00:29 No.4197099 Report

Quoted By: >>4197102 >>4197103

>>4197092
Gordy shot the godfather in academy ratio sorry bud

Negligible crop factor

>>4197091
Event photographers pairing it with a body with a 70-200 on to cover the full focal range short of the far extremes

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Thu 29 Jun 2023 19:09:46 No.4197102 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197099
>academy ratio sorry bud
Aka super 35, with spherical lenses to make your point even more moot.
>Negligible crop factor
Smaller than APS-C (APS-C is 16x24mm).
Educate yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_ratio

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Thu 29 Jun 2023 19:13:21 No.4197103 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197099
For your seething only:
>For The Godfather, Willis shot it in full 35 mm frame -- roughly 4:3 ratio. Gordie knew the film would be cropped down to fit wide screen theaters at around 1.85:1, and planned accordingly, of course. But the difference between this film and many others that are cropped down to fit a wide screen from a full 35 mm frame is that Willis composed every scene to work beautifully in either format, wide screen or full frame.

>So, these days when you see a film that, as they say on TV, 'is modified to fit your screen,' what usually happens is that a chunk of the wide screen version is pulled out and blown up to fill a TV (that's pan and scan). Besides losing the view the director intended, the quality also looks grainy and faded.

>With the Godather, the 'TV versions' until now have been exactly what Willis shot, and in a sense, the theatrical version could be considered a lower quality image because it was blown up from the 35 mm image. Because of this, I've always watched the Godfather in full TV size. So I'm hoping that if there is a non-widescreen version of the film on the DVD, it is the original full frame, and not a blown-up piece of the wide screen frame. In any case, if we have "only" the widescreen version on the DVD, it will still look great.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 22:29:37 No.4197190 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197061
>worst
No such thing, depends on the situation
That said I hate 28mm

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2023 22:51:26 No.4197203 Report

Quoted By: >>4198092

>>4197061
It's subjective and arguing about it is stupid

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jul 2023 04:28:16 No.4198077 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197083
This, "normal" is just "boring"

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jul 2023 05:18:00 No.4198087 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197083
50mm is a portrait lens used by hot guys that the model wants to stand closer to. It's too zoomed in otherwise. If you're not shooting womens portraits you won't understand it.

Once you do shoot womens portraits, you will understand it. That's where you stand. Unless you're real ugly. Then you have a 70-200 as your shortest lens, and talk about how the pixel pitch on the canon 90d gives you more reach than those fackin SNOYs. Unless, I suppose, you shoot fat girls, then you might want 35mm, or even 28mm, on medium format.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jul 2023 06:58:15 No.4198092 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197203
Perfect for 4chan threads.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jul 2023 16:07:12 No.4198196 Report

Quoted By:

>>4197061
75 seems off, like slapping a 50 1.8 on an apsc dslr since its the cheapest lens

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches