The Rise of the Wide-Angle as "normal" lens.

[FrantzM]

Hi

I am forever annoyed at what I call the "smartphone-camera-look" on everything. Most smartphone cameras are wide-angle and that has led most, or perhaps all selfies to be taken with a wide-angle look , thus with the wide-angle distortion of people's faces.. This has become almost a standard, so many YouTube videos are shot with wide-angles for what would , in the old days, require a medium-telephoto lens. Since bokehs now are soooo cool, they use very wide aperture , often very expensive, wide-angle lenses for the bokeh... The same bokehs could have been achieved more simply with a telephoto lens ..
An exemple

Same person ...

Need I say more? Am I, one of the few, this annoys? A lot ?

Peace

 

[Yasofnos]

Relevance to audio?

 

[FrantzM]

Relevance to audio?

Welcome to ASR my fellow audiophile...

You will in due time, I hope, explore the forum, perhaps learn that there is a part of the forum labelled the following way

• Forums > Other Areas of Interest > Photography

Then when you learn to click on those parts of the forum...

Peace

 

[hex168]

"Other areas of interest > Photography" is the forum name.

And yes, the prevalence of wide-angle perspective for subjects it does not suit bothers me too.

 

[Yasofnos]

Hahahaha! Now that's funny. I'll go back to my hole now, apologies all around.

 

[Wes]

I agree, but I think the kids nowadays enjoy the distorted look.

Maybe we should discuss the best portrait lenses?

 

[Tks]

Since bokehs now are soooo cool, they use very wide aperture , often very expensive, wide-angle lenses for the bokeh...

They really don't, they use tons of nonsense processing to achieve such. To get serious bokeh on a wide lens, you can look at something like a Gmaster 12-24 f2.8 from Sony ($3,000 and surprisingly not made in Japan as all their other G-Master's are, but instead China, yet still cost a fortune).

As for the comments about people enjoying the wide angle look. That's been hoisted upon them in the same way videophiles have had CRT's and Plasma's taken from them. A telephoto lens that works as intended is a two fold problem on smartphones with other related issues. First, you need a long as hell selfy stick at the very least if you're going to be one of these lunatics taking images of themselves constantly and randomly. Second, you're going to need a thicker phone, or a thicker camera hump. And the humps these days are getting disgusting in virtually every respect.

Lastly, telephoto lenses worth a damn are actually expensive to make than their average, or wide angle counterparts (which is why you see the longer focal lengths ALWAYS costing more than any other type of lens, once you start trying to offer people wider apertures on top of the longer length). And remember when I said you need a selfy stick? Yeah, I actually lied, because good freaking luck trying to not have image shake trying to balance something that adds another arm's length of distance between you, and it.

And the regular person simply isn't going to pony up the time to learn how to use a telephoto lens (like using a timer, and having the phone perhaps on a tripod or stable platform of some sort, and reframing their shot by moving away from their camera). And even if they do learn this is required, they don't care enough because if they want bokeh, they're usually the same type of person who would say "lul why would anyone buy a camera when you can get the 12 Pro Max that has way more background blur than most cameras for the price". Totally oblivious to the nuance between actual bokeh, and enhanced bokeh digitally achieved.

 

[Ron Texas]

Smartphone lenses have a very short focal length which leads to lots of depth of field and not much bokeh. One may note over the years many compact cameras with a fixed lens used a 28mm focal length. I've walked around with a 28 on my D850 and find it provides a very natural means to get a good composition. OK, for portraits, it sucks.

 

[JeffS7444]

Garry Winogrand did okay using 28 mm lenses, but he wasn't trying to fill the frame with someone's face. For environmental portraits, wide can work very well. I think the "problem" with iPhoneography isn't so much the thing itself so much as careless / thoughtless technique, but photography has never had a shortage of talent-free hacks.

 

[Wes]

35 or die

 

[levimax]

135 mm for portraits

 

[Chromatischism]

I usually advise people to get the camera as far away from their face as they can. Even using digital zoom for framing after that would give a better look.

 

[L5730]

Teeny-tiny sensor + wider lens = similar coverage / FoV.
Hence why APS-C dSLR owners might like a fast 35mm over a 50mm as the latter is too restrictive in field of view. Use a full frame 36x24mm sensor and lenses work 'as they should' if you like. One can go even bigger to medium and large format if they like, but sensor costs are bonkers, a sensor the size of your entire phone anyone?

Small video cameras suffer this same problem. Small sensor and a zoom lens that is rather wide at it short end. Not much good for portraits there, but at least, if one has the room and walk away from the person and (real) zoom in some.

I wonder how many folks with APS-C take a longer lens and snap ~7 images and photomerge to effectively increase the sensor size?

 

[Harmonie]

Relevance to audio?

easy; a wider angle

 

[mhardy6647]

let's see, what can I bring to the party that's almost relevant but not quite?

1) https://icouldbeahero.blogspot.com/2011/06/field-of-view-and-depth-of-field.html

2) for a long time, my favorite lens was a Sigma 10-20 mm f/4 - 5.6 lens kindly given to me by my son (author of the blog above).
It's what I like to call a "real estate ad" lens, as it can make any interior space look cavernous -- albeit with concomitant distortion, which can be particularly unflattering to any human beings on the periphery of the field.


(this house, when it was first "on line" with mostly new furniture - and a little bit we'd moved - and not yet completely cluttered with the junk we ultimately moved up from MA)


It's also pretty good outdoors, too (landscapes)




The last two photos were both taken on what I like to call A Milky Way Night.

3) Fisheyes R fun
fishy_by_icouldbeahero

This Old Camera

A picture a day keeps the demons at bay.

icouldbeahero.blogspot.com

 

[Chromatischism]

Ahh the Nikon D40. An underrated little camera.

 

[JJB70]

I always like 35mm - 40mm lenses as general purpose lenses and if I was to have a fixed lens that would be my preference. The field of view is a bit wider than a 50mm but still has a very natural feel.

 

[Holmz]

Lost peoples typical arm length does not allow for a telephoto “selfie”.
(The “long arm of the law” is also a more symbolic than physical.)

 

[dlaloum]

135 mm for portraits

I preferred 70mm to 90mm...

 

[Chromatischism]

I preferred 70mm to 90mm...

70-105 for more compression, 35-50 for more environment. On full-frame.