Field of View Crop Factor (FOVCF)

Sisteron

Sisteron

Suspended / Banned
Messages
89
Name
Trevor Mc Grath
Edit My Images
Yes
After a good quote from Kerso I'm only a matter of time away from owning a 1D Mark 11 N.

The biggest reason for moving to the 1D is it has a 1.3x (FOVCF).

When your looking at a new camera how big is the Field of View Crop Factor ?
 
Not really important but as joe has said I'm also Nikon so theres no choice.
 
yes I do mean how much a determining factor it becomes when your signing the cheque.

I own a 20D and a 400D both of which are 1.6x and when using a 70-200 lens for rallying I'm often frustrated when I reach a junction and can not get the shots I want.
 
Depends on your subject of interest more than anything. CT loves his birds so the 1.3 or 1.6 crops of his 1Dn mkII and 20D are perfect for framing his little feathered friends.

I like my architecture and landscape so full-frames are my favoured choice.
 
What Jonny said. :D

The focusing speed and fps of the 1D MK2n are in a totally different league... if you need those functions. The FOV though is significantly better than the numbers alone suggest, particularly noticeable when I use the 50mm or the 17-40L.
 
I'm looking to get a second body. I currently have a 20D 1.6 crop which is great for telephoto lens such as the 70-200, but when I try landscape shots a 17-40 isn't quite enough. So I'm currently deciding on whether to go full frame 5D, or just 1.3 (1d mk3) which will still be an advantage over and in addition to the 1.6 crop. I will however wait till the potential focusing problem on the mk3 has been resolved.
 
After a great deal of deliberation I decided the 1D MK2n was the one for me and bought second hand, it only arrived thursday night and initial impressions are the focusing is so much better than my 30D in both speed and accuracy, I must go now to polish my new toy and play.
 
On the Olympus it is a 2x crop factor, so wide angle are a little harder to come by (Except for the superb 7-14 and 11-22mm Olympus ZD lenses), but it has the other advantage of making telephoto's reach longer (150mm kit lens is equiv to 300mm)

The other advantage (To me anyway) is the compactness of the lenses and larger apature for smaller sized lenses.

My walkabout lens is the ZD 14mm-54mm F2.8-F3.5, its small (Same as kit 18-55 in the canon), light and fast and has EFL of 28-110mm. Suits me
 
It's worth remembering that pixel count can have a larger effect than sensor size in some cases.

A good example would be a 1D II camera compared with a 5d. Sure the telephoto range seems like it has a better reach on the 1D but if you crop back to a 1.3x field of view on a 5D image, it's still a bigger file. Probably better quality too.
 
Chillimonster said:
but it has the other advantage of making telephoto's reach longer (150mm kit lens is equiv to 300mm)
Click to expand...

A common mistake. The crop factor on cameras does not make a lenses' reach longer. It affects the field of view but will not increase or decrease the magnification at all, so a 150mm is always going to be a 150mm.
 
Steep said:
A common mistake. The crop factor on cameras does not make a lenses' reach longer. It affects the field of view but will not increase or decrease the magnification at all, so a 150mm is always going to be a 150mm.
Click to expand...


True, but what i was trying to say / show, is that due to the crop the effective field of view is reduced, therfore giving the same FOV as a 300mm lens on a 35mm / full frame camera (Hope that makes sense - Well it makes sense to me anyway :lol: )
 
Yup that makes sense, you see what a 300mm would show, just not as big :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top