Thank you Peter - you are a dynamite teacher. I always learn something new from your videos. I really enjoy your assignments and hope you regularly continue this effort. A great motivation to practice and apply your techniques. Thanks in advance for the comments on our submissions. Good health to you.
Going WILD with Peter's assignments!! Excellent idea Peter... and nice that you let those who CANNOT get out use an old picture so they can still participate.... I would like to see this exercise becoming a recurring thing say once a month or so... something to make us use some function of a camera ... like macro, time lapse, focus stacking.... something that will make us grow as photographers. Thanks for another great video!!!
Peter, another good video 👍. That said, I found it a useful explanation when my photography lecturers said, "a wide-angle lens is any lens that gives a wider viewing angle than the human eye". In other words, any lens that gives a more panoramic view than seen through the human eye. My personal favourite are the Olympus 8mm "fish-eye" and the 7-14mm super-wide-angle zoom. As you correctly explain, one is a rectilinear lens and the other a fish-eye. But it's worth pointing out that the 8mm fish-eye can be rectilinearly corrected using post processing software, as not everyone is aware of the possibility to rectilinearly correct the fish-eye effect in post, thereby making the 8mm fish-eye far more useful in interior shots such as real estate photography. People should also be aware that some cheaper fish-eye lenses weren't originally designed for micro four thirds, and won't give a full 180° angle of view when adapted to the M43 mount. All the best, Rick
I know it happens, but I am surprised people don't know about the lens correction software... excellent remark Mr Bear. I'm keeping my eye wide open on you!!! : )
@@extremelydave Hi Dave, good to see you here. But, you know, it's not that surprising people don't know about rectilinear correction of the barrel effect in fish-eye lenses. After all, most people buy a barrel fish-eye for its barrel distortion effect. That's why we talk about it as a fish-eye lens and not an 8mm super-wide-angle. And, in the olden days of 35mm film cameras and darkrooms (where I come from), there wasn't any such thing as digital post-processing. Keep watching Peter F. for his next inspiring video. He's always got something interesting up his sleeve. Rick
Us humans have a wide panoramic view because we have two eyes, and our eyes move to give us slightly more that a 180° horizontal field of view. Yes you can correct a fisheye but then you have to crop it back to rectangular losing a lot of the picture, which makes the typical rectilinear 7-14mm easier to use. I've seen real estate agents, they'll take one shot in jpg and let the camera do the heavy lifting, they're so not wanting to post develop it.
@@jeffslade1892 Actually, that's not quite right. You'll find that the software to correct for barrel distortion doesn’t crop the image. Rather, it stretches the corners of the image to give you the rectilinear correction. If you search for "rectilinear lens" in Wikipedia, they have a very good visual showing the original barrel distortion above the same image where it's been stretched to give a rectilinear correction. This also explains why the corrected fish-eye image has a wider angle than the uncorrected image. It's all very surreal. Rick
@@mne9476 from my personal experience. Never sell a lens, especially a one that you used over long periods. You get accustomed to it and know it's secrets. I always end up regretting selling my lenses as I always find myself wanting to use them. Anyway good luck with your new lens I hope you take some great shots.
GREAT INFO, PETER! I.m currently shooting a DX 12-24mm zoom lens on a FULL FRAME Nikon, giving me an 18-35mm perspective, and I'm LOVING it! Thanks for this video.....
Nice video again Peter. My most wide angle lens is the " old" four thirds 9-18mm. But i do have an adaptor and will carry on to do my " homework". I actually see that the four third lens is not loosing its price value in the used market and that the newer mft lens(yes small and lighter) price is coming down a lot in the used market.
Greetings from southern Indiana, USA! When I had a 35mm film camera, one of my first lenses was a 24mm wide angle, and I really liked it. I became aware of it from an article about how press photographers liked it on their (Nikon, Canon etc.) since, in a crowd, they could handhold the camera above their head and shoot the subject at f/4 or 5.6 and have a sharp enough photo of the subject (usually a person of note surrounded by people) to crop and put in the paper. And the difference between 34 and 28mm was significant. I've noticed that a foreground can be exaggerated in a way I like. For instance, to give a house a large lawn of grass, when there isn't that much grass. But I've cut out the clutter of other stuff nearby. And I think the word you were looking for was LEAF. While there were leaves on the ground, you were focusing on one leaf. (In an earlier video you had mentioned you wanted your English corrected when you made mistakes like this.)
Interesting, very educational. I have just bought a 8mm Olympus body cap fisheye lens and I like it . I also use on my Pentax K70 a 20 mm pancake lens which in my opinion is great for travel .
I am always impressed with your way of thinking about photography. Now I see focal length in not about subjects. I have a question. I can't grasp the meaning of rectilinear lens. I have a olympus 9-18mm. Is that rectilinear lens? Olympus said 8mm F1.8 is a fisheye. What is the difference?
Fish Eye lens gives you a very wide angle of view, 180 in the cade of M.Zuiko 8mm. Your 9-18mm is a rectlinear lens. It means that distortion has been corrected. It will give an image with fairly straight lines also in the edges of the image.
Liked the video, liked the assignment, but got hasty posting my photo to your site Peter. Not sure if you see the exif on all images, so for the record, mine was done with EM10 mk iii, 14-42 kit lens at 20 mm.
A fear of using wide-angle for people shots is in regard to angle or being too close and making the human look like a space alien. If standing close and/or having the camera tipped a bit with a 50mm + in full frame terms, is one thing, but the exaggerated distortions of a 35mm or below can be distracting or look awful. They always speak of being in the scene with street photography, which is fine, but there must be a limit to how close is too close with wide-angle shots. Do you crop a lot when doing street shots? I like to mix it up a bit and go narrow, standard and wide on street and everywhere -- even landscapes :) Great video Peter, you nailed it again! Thanks, Loren
Enjoyed your RUclips channel for almost a year now. For this assignment, I have submitted a landscape image made with my Olympus 9mm fish-eye body cap lens. Straight out of my camera.
A 'standard lens' gives roughly the same FoV as the human eye. Given the 4/3 sensor image circle diameter is 21.64mm hence 'standard lens for it is 20mm to 25mm. Likewise a full frame or compact film would be 45mm because the image circle diameter there is 43.27mm (50mm is a good approximation)
Wide angle lenses do not have more depth of field - given the same aperture, DOF is the same regardless of focal length. Try it - take a photo with a wide angle lens and a telephoto lens from the exact same position, crop the wide angle shot to match the framing of the telephoto shot.
@mick m43 it's an extremely common misconception. There are plenty of good sources that explain it correctly: www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm I think it comes about because people tend to use telephoto lenses to photograph distant subjects, and wide angle lenses to photograph close subjects, so they think the focal length is making a difference when it's actually just their distance to the subject (the focal distance) and the aperture that affect DOF.
Peter, I think what he means is that when focus distance is adjusted to match field of view, total depth of field is virtually the same whether you’re shooting with a wide-angle or a telephoto lens. That is accurate however not how you, I and most people consider the topic.
What Peter is saying is that, particularly super-wide-angle (SWA) lenses have such enormous depth-of-field at any aperture, that fine focusing is almost irrelevant. The SWA lenses also benefit from the details being smaller, so being slightly out-of-focus is less noticeable. In your test, Stephen, we'd have to crop in a huge amount to see what you're talking about. As such, for all practical purposes the matter can be ignored except in very big enlargements. A worthwhile test though, Stephen. Rick
If the subject is at the same distance, there will be more dof with a wide-angle. If your subject is 15m away and the aperture is set to f5.6. With a 12mm lens the near point is 1,54m and Far Point is infinity. With 45mm the near point is 9,26m and far point is 39,51. If I take the images from the same spot with f5.6 and use two different focal lengths the one taken with a wide-angle has more dof than the one taken with a longer lens. If I take the images so that the distance is not the same and the cropping of the image is the same with a wide-angle and a longer lens the dof is the same. You are correct, but the way I see is a bit different. I think the way I said it is a bit more simpler and practical to everyday photography.
@@ForsgardPeter when you refer to DOF markings on a lens focus scale, those are calculated based on "acceptable sharpness" for a certain print size, with no cropping. So, for example, setting the hyperfocal distance for a certain aperture and printing at a certain size will keep objects at infinity in acceptable sharpness, but if you take a high-res mode shot and make a giant print, or crop in significantly, those objects at infinity are not going to be anywhere near as sharp - you'll have the same thing you'd expect to see if you used a telephoto lens standing in the same spot, but it will happen with a cropped wide angle lens. For most cases it doesn't matter - "wide angle lenses have more DOF" is a basic simplification that applies in many cases, but understanding what's really going on, and how that will change in other cases, can be very helpful. Knowing when you can't trust DOF scales on lenses. Knowing what difference between standing in place and zooming, or cropping later, and moving forward or back to change your perspective will do, can make a huge difference. It can even be helpful to understand the misconceptions about DOF between different sizes.
@@stehlealexander No. But I think I have the information somewhere. Unless Peter knows, I'll get back to you guys. It's a good question. UPDATE I've just emailed Rob Trek, as he uses the Olympus 8mm fish-eye for most of his real estate work and always uses rectilinear correction in post. If anyone knows, it'll be Rob. Failing that, I can run some tests on my Olympus 8mm fish-eye. Rick
Dear Mr Forsgard, congratulation for your videos! i follow you since 2016. permit me to suggest a bit more attractive design for your merchandising you will orobably sell more items. grettings from santander, spain.
No in "fullframe" 36x24mm sensor camera it it lenses under 43mm ( the diagonal of the sensor) that are wide angle lenses, but actually you need to have at least 35mm before you can talk of "real" wide angle :) The same goes for APSC and MTF, do the correct math ! Do not teach wrong...
Yes I very well know that the 43mm is the real standard lens for FF. But it is also true that 50mm is the standard lens in practise. That is what the manufacturers sell as a standard lens. Sometimes it is better not to confuse others making things too complicated.
No no Peter. It's just Pentax who make a "normal" lens, and that is a 43 mm. A lower numer is wider, and bigger number is more tele, but 43 mm is a "normal lens". Nothing else.
![Learn Photography - [4 exercises to boost your CREATIVITY]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yuPsEuAFgGw/mqdefault.jpg)
![Learn Photography - [4 exercises to boost your CREATIVITY]](/img/tr.png)
![How To Take Photos At Night - [7 Tips and Tricks]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-7daeRTmz-I/mqdefault.jpg)
Wide-Angle lens reviews: ruclips.net/p/PLDi4hF9-cy6i8qklqpn7mOQoRWoMbE6HK
Thank you Peter - you are a dynamite teacher. I always learn something new from your videos. I really enjoy your assignments and hope you regularly continue this effort. A great motivation to practice and apply your techniques. Thanks in advance for the comments on our submissions. Good health to you.
Thank you very much.
I like that you concentrated on the character of a lens instead of the quality. Understanding the lens is much more important than pixel peeping.
Thanks Peter - loads of ideas to play with there.
You are welcome.
Nice work Peter, keep um coming !
Thanks, will do!
Love these assignments. Time to get to work.
Have fun!
Thank you very much for this video. And as always, it was super interesting and full of "little treasures" .
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thanks Peter. Very helpful for me.
Glad to hear that!
Hey Karl! Do you use an Olympus?!!
Going WILD with Peter's assignments!! Excellent idea Peter... and nice that you let those who CANNOT get out use an old picture so they can still participate.... I would like to see this exercise becoming a recurring thing say once a month or so... something to make us use some function of a camera ... like macro, time lapse, focus stacking.... something that will make us grow as photographers. Thanks for another great video!!!
Actually I have had these a few times already. The plan is to have an assignment once a month.
Let's go wi(l)de! Thank's Peter.
Thank you, Peter.. good intro!
Glad you like it!
Peter, another good video 👍. That said, I found it a useful explanation when my photography lecturers said, "a wide-angle lens is any lens that gives a wider viewing angle than the human eye". In other words, any lens that gives a more panoramic view than seen through the human eye.
My personal favourite are the Olympus 8mm "fish-eye" and the 7-14mm super-wide-angle zoom. As you correctly explain, one is a rectilinear lens and the other a fish-eye. But it's worth pointing out that the 8mm fish-eye can be rectilinearly corrected using post processing software, as not everyone is aware of the possibility to rectilinearly correct the fish-eye effect in post, thereby making the 8mm fish-eye far more useful in interior shots such as real estate photography.
People should also be aware that some cheaper fish-eye lenses weren't originally designed for micro four thirds, and won't give a full 180° angle of view when adapted to the M43 mount.
All the best,
Rick
I know it happens, but I am surprised people don't know about the lens correction software... excellent remark Mr Bear. I'm keeping my eye wide open on you!!! : )
@@extremelydave Hi Dave, good to see you here. But, you know, it's not that surprising people don't know about rectilinear correction of the barrel effect in fish-eye lenses. After all, most people buy a barrel fish-eye for its barrel distortion effect. That's why we talk about it as a fish-eye lens and not an 8mm super-wide-angle. And, in the olden days of 35mm film cameras and darkrooms (where I come from), there wasn't any such thing as digital post-processing.
Keep watching Peter F. for his next inspiring video. He's always got something interesting up his sleeve.
Rick
Us humans have a wide panoramic view because we have two eyes, and our eyes move to give us slightly more that a 180° horizontal field of view.
Yes you can correct a fisheye but then you have to crop it back to rectangular losing a lot of the picture, which makes the typical rectilinear 7-14mm easier to use. I've seen real estate agents, they'll take one shot in jpg and let the camera do the heavy lifting, they're so not wanting to post develop it.
@@jeffslade1892 Actually, that's not quite right. You'll find that the software to correct for barrel distortion doesn’t crop the image. Rather, it stretches the corners of the image to give you the rectilinear correction. If you search for "rectilinear lens" in Wikipedia, they have a very good visual showing the original barrel distortion above the same image where it's been stretched to give a rectilinear correction. This also explains why the corrected fish-eye image has a wider angle than the uncorrected image. It's all very surreal.
Rick
Riktigt bra tips! 👌
Tack!
Perfecto, Peter !!!
Thanks Peter for a very interesting video! I always learn from your experience, and I appreciate your making them. Please keep up the good work.
Thank you.
Nice video. I just ordered m.zuiko 9-18mm f4-5.6 lens. Should arrive in a week. Then I'll be up for the challenge.
I just put my 9-18 up for sale and I am afraid I will cry when I see it go. My favorite m43 lens so far, but I want to get the 12-45
@@mne9476 from my personal experience. Never sell a lens, especially a one that you used over long periods. You get accustomed to it and know it's secrets. I always end up regretting selling my lenses as I always find myself wanting to use them. Anyway good luck with your new lens I hope you take some great shots.
GREAT INFO, PETER! I.m currently shooting a DX 12-24mm zoom lens on a FULL FRAME Nikon, giving me an 18-35mm perspective, and I'm LOVING it!
Thanks for this video.....
Glad it was helpful.
Great video Peter. I've been using the 9-18mm after viewing your review of this lens 2 years ago!
thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience
Thank you.
I learned something new or 2. Thanks, Peter...great help!
Glad to help.
Nice video again Peter. My most wide angle lens is the " old" four thirds 9-18mm. But i do have an adaptor and will carry on to do my " homework". I actually see that the four third lens is not loosing its price value in the used market and that the newer mft lens(yes small and lighter) price is coming down a lot in the used market.
Greetings from southern Indiana, USA! When I had a 35mm film camera, one of my first lenses was a 24mm wide angle, and I really liked it. I became aware of it from an article about how press photographers liked it on their (Nikon, Canon etc.) since, in a crowd, they could handhold the camera above their head and shoot the subject at f/4 or 5.6 and have a sharp enough photo of the subject (usually a person of note surrounded by people) to crop and put in the paper. And the difference between 34 and 28mm was significant. I've noticed that a foreground can be exaggerated in a way I like. For instance, to give a house a large lawn of grass, when there isn't that much grass. But I've cut out the clutter of other stuff nearby.
And I think the word you were looking for was LEAF. While there were leaves on the ground, you were focusing on one leaf. (In an earlier video you had mentioned you wanted your English corrected when you made mistakes like this.)
Interesting, very educational. I have just bought a 8mm Olympus body cap fisheye lens and I like it . I also use on my Pentax K70 a 20 mm pancake lens which in my opinion is great for travel .
Glad it was helpful!
Great video Peter. I have learned many interesting tips from this one. I'm going out to shoot with my GX-85 and 20mm pancake today. Inspired!
Greta to hear!
I am always impressed with your way of thinking about photography.
Now I see focal length in not about subjects.
I have a question.
I can't grasp the meaning of rectilinear lens.
I have a olympus 9-18mm. Is that rectilinear lens?
Olympus said 8mm F1.8 is a fisheye.
What is the difference?
Fish Eye lens gives you a very wide angle of view, 180 in the cade of M.Zuiko 8mm. Your 9-18mm is a rectlinear lens. It means that distortion has been corrected. It will give an image with fairly straight lines also in the edges of the image.
@@ForsgardPeter
Thank you Peter!
Now I understand.
Fisheye lens or rectilinear lens are not about focal length.
Liked the video, liked the assignment, but got hasty posting my photo to your site Peter. Not sure if you see the exif on all images, so for the record, mine was done with EM10 mk iii, 14-42 kit lens at 20 mm.
A fear of using wide-angle for people shots is in regard to angle or being too close and making the human look like a space alien. If standing close and/or having the camera tipped a bit with a 50mm + in full frame terms, is one thing, but the exaggerated distortions of a 35mm or below can be distracting or look awful. They always speak of being in the scene with street photography, which is fine, but there must be a limit to how close is too close with wide-angle shots. Do you crop a lot when doing street shots? I like to mix it up a bit and go narrow, standard and wide on street and everywhere -- even landscapes :) Great video Peter, you nailed it again! Thanks, Loren
Sometimes I do crop. Not really that much.
Thanks for a great video
Glad you enjoyed it
Enjoyed your RUclips channel for almost a year now. For this assignment, I have submitted a landscape image made with my Olympus 9mm fish-eye body cap lens. Straight out of my camera.
Great to hear!
A 'standard lens' gives roughly the same FoV as the human eye. Given the 4/3 sensor image circle diameter is 21.64mm hence 'standard lens for it is 20mm to 25mm. Likewise a full frame or compact film would be 45mm because the image circle diameter there is 43.27mm (50mm is a good approximation)
12-100mm f4 pro is my only wide angle 😊
At the sake of looking foolish, I have that lens, I am a newbee, How do I know if I am using the "wide angle " option.
At the sake of looking foolish, I have the 12-100 f4 pro lens, I am a newbie, How do I know if I am using the "wide-angle " option.
When you are using the wide end of the zoom.
Wide angle lenses do not have more depth of field - given the same aperture, DOF is the same regardless of focal length. Try it - take a photo with a wide angle lens and a telephoto lens from the exact same position, crop the wide angle shot to match the framing of the telephoto shot.
@mick m43 it's an extremely common misconception. There are plenty of good sources that explain it correctly: www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm
I think it comes about because people tend to use telephoto lenses to photograph distant subjects, and wide angle lenses to photograph close subjects, so they think the focal length is making a difference when it's actually just their distance to the subject (the focal distance) and the aperture that affect DOF.
Peter, I think what he means is that when focus distance is adjusted to match field of view, total depth of field is virtually the same whether you’re shooting with a wide-angle or a telephoto lens. That is accurate however not how you, I and most people consider the topic.
What Peter is saying is that, particularly super-wide-angle (SWA) lenses have such enormous depth-of-field at any aperture, that fine focusing is almost irrelevant. The SWA lenses also benefit from the details being smaller, so being slightly out-of-focus is less noticeable. In your test, Stephen, we'd have to crop in a huge amount to see what you're talking about. As such, for all practical purposes the matter can be ignored except in very big enlargements.
A worthwhile test though, Stephen.
Rick
If the subject is at the same distance, there will be more dof with a wide-angle. If your subject is 15m away and the aperture is set to f5.6. With a 12mm lens the near point is 1,54m and Far Point is infinity. With 45mm the near point is 9,26m and far point is 39,51.
If I take the images from the same spot with f5.6 and use two different focal lengths the one taken with a wide-angle has more dof than the one taken with a longer lens.
If I take the images so that the distance is not the same and the cropping of the image is the same with a wide-angle and a longer lens the dof is the same.
You are correct, but the way I see is a bit different. I think the way I said it is a bit more simpler and practical to everyday photography.
@@ForsgardPeter when you refer to DOF markings on a lens focus scale, those are calculated based on "acceptable sharpness" for a certain print size, with no cropping. So, for example, setting the hyperfocal distance for a certain aperture and printing at a certain size will keep objects at infinity in acceptable sharpness, but if you take a high-res mode shot and make a giant print, or crop in significantly, those objects at infinity are not going to be anywhere near as sharp - you'll have the same thing you'd expect to see if you used a telephoto lens standing in the same spot, but it will happen with a cropped wide angle lens.
For most cases it doesn't matter - "wide angle lenses have more DOF" is a basic simplification that applies in many cases, but understanding what's really going on, and how that will change in other cases, can be very helpful. Knowing when you can't trust DOF scales on lenses. Knowing what difference between standing in place and zooming, or cropping later, and moving forward or back to change your perspective will do, can make a huge difference. It can even be helpful to understand the misconceptions about DOF between different sizes.
How much mm is the 8mm if it is not in the fish eye mode? Correction in the em1
I take it you're asking, how much of the near 180° viewing angle is clipped and lost if you use rectilinear correction on Olympus' 8mm fish-eye lens?
Not really sure what the angle of view is corrected. It is a bit more that 7mm is.
@@rickbear7249 correct 🙌🏻😅 - do you know it?
@@stehlealexander No. But I think I have the information somewhere. Unless Peter knows, I'll get back to you guys. It's a good question.
UPDATE
I've just emailed Rob Trek, as he uses the Olympus 8mm fish-eye for most of his real estate work and always uses rectilinear correction in post. If anyone knows, it'll be Rob. Failing that, I can run some tests on my Olympus 8mm fish-eye.
Rick
By the way, I seem to recall that Olympus' 8mm fish-eye lens isn't a true 180° fish-eye. I'll try to get the exact angle for that too.
Rick
Dear Mr Forsgard, congratulation for your videos! i follow you since 2016. permit me to suggest a bit more attractive design for your merchandising you will orobably sell more items. grettings from santander, spain.
You are right I have not really paid any attention that. I should and thanks for pointing it out.
9:50 Today's favourite
No in "fullframe" 36x24mm sensor camera it it lenses under 43mm ( the diagonal of the sensor) that are wide angle lenses, but actually you need to have at least 35mm before you can talk of "real" wide angle :) The same goes for APSC and MTF, do the correct math ! Do not teach wrong...
Yes I very well know that the 43mm is the real standard lens for FF. But it is also true that 50mm is the standard lens in practise. That is what the manufacturers sell as a standard lens. Sometimes it is better not to confuse others making things too complicated.
No no Peter. It's just Pentax who make a "normal" lens, and that is a 43 mm. A lower numer is wider, and bigger number is more tele, but 43 mm is a "normal lens". Nothing else.
You are right. 43mm in a FF body is the normal lens.