All Forum Comments
Comment by Anvh posted on FoV vs AoV at 26/01/2010 - 00:47
Daniel Bridge wrote:
If it is always referring to the vertical field of view, then yes, that would be different to the photographic AoV, however, the term might have a specific meaning within that software, so may not always refer to the vertical. It would certainly make more sense to talk about horizontal fields of view in most instances, as far as I can see.
Dan
Dan, I've used diagonal just for you in the comment above If it is always referring to the vertical field of view, then yes, that would be different to the photographic AoV, however, the term might have a specific meaning within that software, so may not always refer to the vertical. It would certainly make more sense to talk about horizontal fields of view in most instances, as far as I can see.
Dan
Comment by Anvh posted on FoV vs AoV at 26/01/2010 - 00:24
Indeed Hefty
So if I'm correct then you can get the same field of view with the same lens on APS-C or on FF if both aspect ratios are the same right?
Let's see...
A 50mm lens
APS-C sensor with 1.5x crop and 3:2 ratio at a distance of 12 meter gives me 692.27cm diagonal FOV
FF 3:2 ratio at a distance of 8 meter = 692.27cm diagonal FOV
... so the fight between K10D and Iceblinker was not correct
... right?
So if I'm correct then you can get the same field of view with the same lens on APS-C or on FF if both aspect ratios are the same right?
Let's see...
A 50mm lens
APS-C sensor with 1.5x crop and 3:2 ratio at a distance of 12 meter gives me 692.27cm diagonal FOV
FF 3:2 ratio at a distance of 8 meter = 692.27cm diagonal FOV
... so the fight between K10D and Iceblinker was not correct
... right?
Comment by Anvh posted on FoV vs AoV at 26/01/2010 - 00:23
Yes Dan something like that
Here we go, I've been learned this.
Looks different then angle of view right?http://www.jmckell.com/3Dcamera.html
And this is Angle of View if I'm correct.
Here we go, I've been learned this.
Looks different then angle of view right?http://www.jmckell.com/3Dcamera.html
And this is Angle of View if I'm correct.
Comment by Anvh posted on FoV vs AoV at 26/01/2010 - 00:03
Sometimes it seems that way but, I thought that FOV is truly a field in what you see in photogrphic terms so you need to have a distance and dimensions to get it.
Also with lenses AOV is always use, i've never seen FOV there.. well on forums but if you look up official specs it's always AOV.
Also with lenses AOV is always use, i've never seen FOV there.. well on forums but if you look up official specs it's always AOV.
Comment by Anvh posted on FoV vs AoV at 25/01/2010 - 23:54
Alright I'm confused...
What is difference between VoF (field of view) and AoV (angle of view)?
What is difference between VoF (field of view) and AoV (angle of view)?
Comment by Anvh posted on FoV vs AoV at 25/01/2010 - 23:46
Mike-P wrote:
Stefan, where does he say he wants a fast lens for sport?
All I see is is a question asking about a lens/teleconverter combo for safari
The other topic the current OP (WobblyGoblin) is referring to Stefan, where does he say he wants a fast lens for sport?
All I see is is a question asking about a lens/teleconverter combo for safari
It was one of the more recent topics about this lens around 4 to 6 months ago
Comment by Anvh posted on Can a lens with a teleconverter really be that good... at 25/01/2010 - 23:23
axl wrote:
Exactly what I'm saying, on the other side, while trying DA*200 in shop, I didn't even have to really try hard and the PF was all over the place
Show them please Exactly what I'm saying, on the other side, while trying DA*200 in shop, I didn't even have to really try hard and the PF was all over the place
Comment by Anvh posted on 300mm f4 vs 200mm2.8+TC at 25/01/2010 - 23:22
I believe 35mm is a different market then APS-C, why else would Canon bring out the D7?
Also if sensor size is so important then the 645D will blow al those 35mm cameras away
But like said, you buy a camera for a specific purpose, the APS-C is for most now the best compromise.
For myself I find the aps-c perfect,it's small and the lenses are lighter and smaller as well and it does what I want... why would I need a 35mm???
Although I do fancy a MF though, just for the nature of those camera's.
There is no better or worse I think, they are all different compromises.
Also if sensor size is so important then the 645D will blow al those 35mm cameras away
But like said, you buy a camera for a specific purpose, the APS-C is for most now the best compromise.
For myself I find the aps-c perfect,it's small and the lenses are lighter and smaller as well and it does what I want... why would I need a 35mm???
Although I do fancy a MF though, just for the nature of those camera's.
There is no better or worse I think, they are all different compromises.
Comment by Anvh posted on Full Frame Pentax!!!!!!! at 25/01/2010 - 21:12
the 72 is PPI it's a number use to convert pixels to inch size.
so 720 pixels wide would be 10 inch, because there are 72 pixels in every inch.
If pixels are asked then you can forget about the 72PPI just give them a photo of 1000 pixels... I believe 1000 pixels is minimum size so you can send them bigger photos, they probably need that amount of pixels to get a decent print out of it.
It also does not need to be square.
so 720 pixels wide would be 10 inch, because there are 72 pixels in every inch.
If pixels are asked then you can forget about the 72PPI just give them a photo of 1000 pixels... I believe 1000 pixels is minimum size so you can send them bigger photos, they probably need that amount of pixels to get a decent print out of it.
It also does not need to be square.
Comment by Anvh posted on Uploading from Gallery for Pentax User Gallery at 25/01/2010 - 20:40
http://www.answers.com/topic/angle-of-view-1
http://www.mhohner.de/formulas.php#fov
This correct right, before I get it all wrong again...