On iPhones, the 1X camera is not a "normal" lens. The 2X camera is not a "telephoto" lens. Why? In 35mm terms, a "normal" lens is 44 mm. That is the diagonal of a 24mm x 36mm frame. (See Pythagoras). The 1X lens on an iPhone is 26mm. Hardly "normal." It is a wide angle lens. The 2X lens is 52mm. Slightly telephoto. Try this experiment. Shoot a subject with both 1X and 2X. The 1X photo will appear distorted. The 2X photo is closer to normal. I only use the 1X lens for landscapes or if I can't get back far enough to get in all of the people in a group.
Nobody cares. Standards change. Almost no one uses 50mm lenses on full frame these days anyway. That has moved to 35mm and even 28mm.
Generally not for portraits, altho some people have naturally small noses and small body frames that those wider lenses might improve on by filling the space better.
How do you define portrait? Is it just when you get fairly close, or is it when you take a deliberate amount of time to set the photo up as a portrait? If the latter, then a 50 is still not the lens. For that, normally it’s 85 to 105. A 50 is a terrible portrait lens.
Full-frame? I've shot tighter when the situation warrants, but anything from 85 to 200 works really well as you know, while anything between 40 and 200 on APS-C does well, 55mm for example being the 85 full-frame equivalent. Certainly never a 26 FF equivalent tho which is what the OP was referring to, nor even what you've deemed the "new norm" from 28mm -35mm. Perhaps you've confused it as the "new norm' for 4/3 mirrorless. On full-frame that's still pretty wide and not usually suited for portraiture except for certain poses/body types or group shots.
You know anything under 40mm is going to have noticeable distortion to a discerning eye.
Equivalency chart for those curious about the conversion between sensor sizes: https://mmcalc.com/
focal length has nothing to do with distortion. It’s perspective.
On iPhones, the 1X camera is not a "normal" lens. The 2X camera is not a "telephoto" lens. Why? In 35mm terms, a "normal" lens is 44 mm. That is the diagonal of a 24mm x 36mm frame. (See Pythagoras). The 1X lens on an iPhone is 26mm. Hardly "normal." It is a wide angle lens. The 2X lens is 52mm. Slightly telephoto. Try this experiment. Shoot a subject with both 1X and 2X. The 1X photo will appear distorted. The 2X photo is closer to normal. I only use the 1X lens for landscapes or if I can't get back far enough to get in all of the people in a group.
Nobody cares. Standards change. Almost no one uses 50mm lenses on full frame these days anyway. That has moved to 35mm and even 28mm.
Nobody cares? Seriously? 35mm and 28mm are for people who don't want to focus. in landscapes, buildings will "lean in" on the left and right edges. In group portraits, people in front will look larger. And by the way, I care how my photos look.
On iPhones, the 1X camera is not a "normal" lens. The 2X camera is not a "telephoto" lens. Why? In 35mm terms, a "normal" lens is 44 mm. That is the diagonal of a 24mm x 36mm frame. (See Pythagoras). The 1X lens on an iPhone is 26mm. Hardly "normal." It is a wide angle lens. The 2X lens is 52mm. Slightly telephoto. Try this experiment. Shoot a subject with both 1X and 2X. The 1X photo will appear distorted. The 2X photo is closer to normal. I only use the 1X lens for landscapes or if I can't get back far enough to get in all of the people in a group.
Nobody cares. Standards change. Almost no one uses 50mm lenses on full frame these days anyway. That has moved to 35mm and even 28mm.
Nobody cares? Seriously? 35mm and 28mm are for people who don't want to focus. in landscapes, buildings will "lean in" on the left and right edges. In group portraits, people in front will look larger. And by the way, I care how my photos look.
Did you read carefully? I said those lenses are the preferred walking around lenses. I didn’t say they were the preferred portrait lenses. The 50 used to be the preferred walking around lens, but not anymore. I said that people don’t care much about 50mm these days other than for the very expensive, very fast, heavy and large models we’ve seen coming out the last two years, or so. Considering that they are all priced well above $1,000, there is a relatively small market for them.
if you followed the thread, you would see that I also said that the preferred portrait lenses are between 85 and 105mm.
Comments
if you followed the thread, you would see that I also said that the preferred portrait lenses are between 85 and 105mm.