ckthual Posted October 24, 2006 Share #1 Posted October 24, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, I've looked in the Manual, but didn't find my answer... my question : If the DLux-3 makes, at wide angle zoom position, 28mm pictures in 16/9 (35mm equivalent), if I shoot in 3/2, what focal does it make (stil 335mm equi) ? about 35mm? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 24, 2006 Posted October 24, 2006 Hi ckthual, Take a look here DLux-3 Silly mathematic question. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ho_co Posted October 24, 2006 Share #2 Posted October 24, 2006 Cedric-- It figures out to about 31.6 mm equivalent on 35mm. Not at all a silly question, particularly since it's hard to say that anything with a 16:9 aspect ratio has a "35mm equivalent." By my calculations, assuming 6.3 mm focal length: At 16:9, camera makes image of 67.7° horizontal f.o.v. and 75.3° diagonal. At 3:2, camera makes image of 59.4° horizontal f.o.v. and 68.8° diagonal. At 4:3, camera makes image of 53.8° horizontal f.o.v. and 64.8° diagonal. In all cases, vertical field of view is 41.7°. I hope that helps! --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckthual Posted October 25, 2006 Author Share #3 Posted October 25, 2006 Thanks a lot for your answer, I was a little lost with the figures... 31.6mm sounds OK to me (still considering to buy one...) ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted October 25, 2006 Share #4 Posted October 25, 2006 Cedric-- It took me a long time to come up with numbers that made sense because I couldn't figure out whether when they said "28mm equivalent" they were measuring the long side or the diagonal. And then I realized I didn't remember the trigonometry correctly etc. I finally got help--guess where? On this forum! I've got the D-Lux 2 and I love it. You may just find when you start shooting that the 16:9 format feels 'right' most of the time. Almost everyone I know who has used one of these has found that format very comfortable--see the review by Sean Reid, the comments by Michael Reichman etc. I think you'll like it if you get it.! --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.