This is the classic sequence we see in all of the lens catalogs — the same subject, shot from the same place, with different lenses. (There is no fisheye for point-and-shoot cameras, but the general point is still valid.)
In the other two general focal length comparison studies, the lake sequence and the chess sequence, I kept moving forward to keep the subject at roughly the same size. Here I shot from the same place — just changing focal length. It is a simple but interesting thing to do — a big reminder that choice of focal length matters drastically. Just because the camera is pointing in the same direction does not mean you are taking the same photo. Once again, we see how the longer lenses isolate the subject both by the narrowness of angle and by focus.
Bottom Line 1: If you stand in the same place, using lenses of very different focal lengths, you get entirely different photographs: the subject actually changes as you see more or see less in the frame.
Bottom Line 2: With a telephoto lens, focus isolation becomes very pronounced; with a wide-angle, it dwindles.
These were all taken at 1/750, at f5.6, at ISO 1600.
Left
Right
This is a segment of the 50mm shot cropped to about the same size as the 200mm shot. Notice that, although both were shot with different focal lengths, the shape of Nicole's face is the same in both.
Also notice that the depth of field of the leaves behind Nicole is not the same, though both were shot at f5.6.
50mm, cropped to match 200mm
The 8mm Sigma fisheye: I was standing in the door to the porch, slightly under the roof, which cuts into the circular top of the image, while you can also see one leg of the tripod at the bottom.
With this lens, the porch is covered with leaves, and might want to be swept. Bell, the dog, in in the photo.
8mm fisheye
At 15mm the focal length is wide enough to capture quite a bit, but without the fisheye look. There is the typical distortion we see with a wide-angle lens, particularly a wide zoom. This can be fixed in the computer.
15mm
At 24mm we still see that Nicole is on a porch - with the railing still distorted due to the wide angle lens. Bell, the dog, has wandered out of the frame.
24mm
At 50mm, Nicole is half as big as she was at 100mm, twice as big as at 24mm. But the background appears to be nearly in focus. Nicole is starting to become the subject of the shot, rather than just a scale figure to add size and interest.
50mm
At 100mm, the image becomes a snapshot sort of thing — the shot we take to prove that somebody WAS somewhere. The background shows as more out of focus, but doesn't isolate Nicole very well and has a busy texture.
100mm
At 200mm the background appears nicely out of focus, so you "get" the fall concept, but it is clearly a portrait of Nicole.
At 200mm it is not necessary to sweep the porch any more — there is no porch.
200mm
This 400mm photo of Nicole demonstrates that you CAN have too much focal length — to me her face looks odd here, too wide. This is the flip side of the distortion with wide angles at closeup. This effect is made stronger by the flat light — had there been more directional light from the left, the wide face look would be less of a problem.
400mm
This is a segment of the 50mm shot cropped to about the same size as the 200mm shot. Notice that, although both were shot with different focal lengths, the shape of Nicole's face is the same in both.
Also notice that the depth of field of the leaves behind Nicole is not the same, though both were shot at f5.6.
50mm, cropped to match 200mm
The 8mm Sigma fisheye: I was standing in the door to the porch, slightly under the roof, which cuts into the circular top of the image, while you can also see one leg of the tripod at the bottom.
With this lens, the porch is covered with leaves, and might want to be swept. Bell, the dog, in in the photo.
8mm fisheye
At 15mm the focal length is wide enough to capture quite a bit, but without the fisheye look. There is the typical distortion we see with a wide-angle lens, particularly a wide zoom. This can be fixed in the computer.
15mm
At 24mm we still see that Nicole is on a porch - with the railing still distorted due to the wide angle lens. Bell, the dog, has wandered out of the frame.
24mm
At 50mm, Nicole is half as big as she was at 100mm, twice as big as at 24mm. But the background appears to be nearly in focus. Nicole is starting to become the subject of the shot, rather than just a scale figure to add size and interest.
50mm
At 100mm, the image becomes a snapshot sort of thing — the shot we take to prove that somebody WAS somewhere. The background shows as more out of focus, but doesn't isolate Nicole very well and has a busy texture.
100mm
At 200mm the background appears nicely out of focus, so you "get" the fall concept, but it is clearly a portrait of Nicole.
At 200mm it is not necessary to sweep the porch any more — there is no porch.
200mm
This 400mm photo of Nicole demonstrates that you CAN have too much focal length — to me her face looks odd here, too wide. This is the flip side of the distortion with wide angles at closeup. This effect is made stronger by the flat light — had there been more directional light from the left, the wide face look would be less of a problem.
