Half frame cameras and Focal length ?

[BADGER.BRAD]

Does the Half frame double ( or there a bouts) the focal length ?

Thanks all.

 

[StephenM]

No and yes....

Focal length is a fixed property of an optical system. It only varies when components are added or removed.

Angle of view (and therefore how much will fill the frame) will decrease as you record less of the image. As half frame is about 1/2 frame )) it only records half as much, so fills the frame with less. The effect would be the same (apart from loss of quality due to extra enlargement) as using a lens of about double the focal length on a full frame camera.

I suspect you meant the latter; I'm always a pedant on this topic because focal length doesn't change, and nor do other relevant properties like depth of field etc.

 

[woof woof]

Does the Half frame double ( or there a bouts) the focal length ?

Thanks all.

I think thinking about this too much just melts your brain and 100 different people with give you 357.8 different answers so I think it's best to just say "Yes" and then get on with your life.

For example.

My Full Frame A7 with a 50mm lens gives the same field of view as...
My Micro Four Thirds (a x2 crop system) GX9 with a 25mm lens.
An APS-C camera (x1.5 crop system) with a 35mm lens (actually it should be 33mm but I don't think anyone makes one.)

Hope that helps. On with life!

 

[BADGER.BRAD]

Thanks, I was guessing there would be a crop factor involved, I was thinking originally of getting/using a half frame camera for general snap shots but as the effective focal length ( If that's what to call it) is so long it just makes them useless for most of my photography which tends to be at the wide angle end. Anything less that 135 film is too long a focal length because of the crop factor, fixed lens mechanical cameras seem to have much too long a focal length (45mm or so) and then an SLR is too big/heavy for everyday carry. The only thing that seems to be quite wide is the electronic point and shoots which I'm not keen on as I'm trying in film turns to move away from electronics. The search continues for a mechanical,smallish,camera with a wide 28mm or wider lens with multiple shutter speeds and apertures. I'm probably asking too much !

 

[woof woof]

Thanks, I was guessing there would be a crop factor involved, I was thinking originally of getting/using a half frame camera for general snap shots but as the effective focal length ( If that's what to call it) is so long it just makes them useless for most of my photography which tends to be at the wide angle end. Anything less that 135 film is too long a focal length because of the crop factor, fixed lens mechanical cameras seem to have much too long a focal length (45mm or so) and then an SLR is too big/heavy for everyday carry. The only thing that seems to be quite wide is the electronic point and shoots which I'm not keen on as I'm trying in film turns to move away from electronics. The search continues for a mechanical,smallish,camera with a wide 28mm or wider lens with multiple shutter speeds and apertures. I'm probably asking too much !

Yup.

I started with a Kodak Instamatic which had a 43mm lens, later I had an Olympus trip which had a 40mm, a Canon QL which had a 45mm and a Jessops Quickshot which was fixed focus and had I think had a 38mm lens.

Just a thought but I've just bought a Fuji X100s which is a simple APS-C digital camera. It has a dial for the shutter speed and an aperture ring on the lens. You can even use the OVF if you don't like the EVF. I know it's an electronic camera and it has a 35mm equivalent lens but it's really simple and it handles like a film camera. Could one interest you?

Or, how about an Olympus OM10 35mm film camera. They're small and you can get a 28mm f2.8 for it.

 

[BADGER.BRAD]

I did look at various Fuji and Olympus cameras before I went for the Sony A6000 , I thought the Fuji really did look like an old rangefinder style camera. In the end it came down too what was available locally to me at the time Hence the Sony. I would have liked the mechanical style of the Fuji ( not sure if you are electronically switching settings with the lens or whether it's a mechanical set up) but it would have been nicer ( I hate menus ). I was looking for a mechanical film camera mainly to challenge my self to use it in Low light with film , Which is something I never really have done before. The Sony is almost cheating as I just point the thing and it works the rest out or if I go full manual I can see in the view finder if I'm somewhere near, not that I'm moaning as it is an fantastic camera .

 

[woof woof]

I did look at various Fuji and Olympus cameras before I went for the Sony A6000 , I thought the Fuji really did look like an old rangefinder style camera. In the end it came down too what was available locally to me at the time Hence the Sony. I would have liked the mechanical style of the Fuji ( not sure if you are electronically switching settings with the lens or whether it's a mechanical set up) but it would have been nicer ( I hate menus ). I was looking for a mechanical film camera mainly to challenge my self to use it in Low light with film , Which is something I never really have done before. The Sony is almost cheating as I just point the thing and it works the rest out or if I go full manual I can see in the view finder if I'm somewhere near, not that I'm moaning as it is an fantastic camera .

I know what you mean.

Is one of the smaller SLR's definitely not on the list?

I haven't had an Olympus SLR but I do have a Oly 28mm f2.8 and it is tiny. The 24mm f2.8 is tiny too but will cost you more.

 

[ChrisR]

Since a half frame camera is 18x24mm (or maybe 16x24 to allow for the extra inter-frame gap?) rather than 36x24mm for "full frame", the area is halved but the linear dimensions are not. I'd suspect that the crop factor is 1.4, rather than 2. But I haven't sat down to do the maths!