0

This question already has an answer here:

I have heard wide lenses make your head inflated which isnt good for portraits like the telephoto which deinflates your head.

So If I use 35mm prime on full frame. Does it mean I will get perfect human vision? Our vision is rather "elliptical diagonal" but how close an 35mm on full frame will be to the human vision whatever angle of view or distortions? How close will it be to the putting my head to the where lens is when I shoot it?

I know two eyes give sideways wider angle of view while one eye reduces it and I would like comparisions to the both open eye situations.

I also know there is always the fact that cameras sensors use nothing but the 3:2 aspect ratio.

Altough my question looks like an simple angle of vision thing. I also don't want the lens to stretch the image as in this example..

If you try to 50mm then the image is too zoomed (at least according to this comment by rackandboneman "I would assume something like a 12mm equivalent to be closer to what we perceive as our field of vision :) and if you try bigger angle of view lenses then the stretching effect starts to happen and there is always the barrel distortion stuff.

So what lenses gives the most eye like vision on full frame? How should I crop the photos for human aspect ratio? At least in a single camera setup and not a two lens 3D setup which I suppose be more realistic.

marked as duplicate by scottbb, xiota, Tetsujin, mattdm lens Aug 15 at 19:32

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • I would assume something like a 12mm equivalent to be closer to what we perceive as our field of vision :) – rackandboneman Aug 15 at 19:11
  • 1
    @rackandboneman 's comment is the spanner in the works - because 'apparent view size' is not 'field of vision' so the two cannot really be compared. – Tetsujin Aug 15 at 19:19
  • The "bright frame we seem to see" is so very different from our perspective :) – rackandboneman Aug 15 at 19:22
3

The eye does not use a projection plane but some sort of spherical projection surface which is converted to 3D in "post production". This 3D conversion even happens (using motion estimation and integration) when looking just with one eye. There are considerably different resolutions in the core viewing area and peripheral vision.

In general, it is agreed that about 50mm (135 equivalent) works reasonably well for the kind of perspective experienced in reasonably close situations (like portraits). It doesn't give you the kind of subjective angle you'd think you see landscapes in, though.

  • Thanks for the answer and welcome to the Photography Stack Exchange! I also would like to ask. Should I crop or 3:2 is good enough? – Delta Oscar Uniform Aug 15 at 19:28
  • 2
    Please ask separate questions separately. But... when should you crop? "Good enough" for -what? – mattdm Aug 15 at 19:33

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.