Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Question about 6 Plus Camera
- Thread starter VanDerMac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No. Its focal length is fixed. It protrudes because of the optical image stabilization (OIS) which jiggles the lens to counteract shaking. The zoom is digital from software manipulation, not a physical zoom.Does the 6 Plus Camera zoom in and out? Judging by the looks of it the 6 Plus has a protruding camera ring which makes one wonder why
Which will mean you won't receive any benefits from focal length compression. Best rule of thumb is to just compose as well you can and crop later, which is essentially what the digital zoom is doing.
Cool part is prime lenses encourage you to 'foot zoom', changing the perspective of the shot, training you to take better pictures.
Good point.
----------
Back in the old days (35mm film) folks only had a fixed prime lens (eg 50mm) and had to "zoom" by composing the shot properly. A lost art.
Actually you will get the same compression that you'd get with a longer focal length.
Actually compression (making things look flatter or things in the background look bigger) is a function of how close to the subject you are.
There are multiple lens elements indie the iPhone. These lenses DO move for focusing purposes. Has nothing to do with zooming.
Zooming is changing the focal length which the iPhone can not do as it is a fixed focal length prime lens.
The reason the lens protrudes is NOT because of image stabilization. It is due to Apple not wanting to compromise and using a great lens in a thin phone. They likely just plain could not cram it in the iPhone 6 case.
LOL, you got that right, some of the posts are really funny and I can see why people remain confused. For some there is no hope, but if they are having fun . . . .
No, not at all. Do not label what I say as misinformation if your knowledge on the subject is ignorant.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=672913
If you can dispute what they say on that thread then be my guest.
----------
Seems like both of you are spouting misinformation. It's distance to subject, and background distance, not focal length that determines perspective and compression.
Excuse me. Where did I make any statement about perspective and compression.
Your spout seems broken.
You were agreeing with him saying so much misinformation which was in response to me.
Dispute the person who is making all of these claims, but making sure he supports every statement by bending over backwards to change focal lengths, moving in and away, AND THE BIG KEY, cropping his images to make a point.
But of course, no, in all of your wisdom you're perfectly correct. I'll be sure to remember all of this and skip my wide angle lenses next time I want an involved image, and instead stick to a telephoto and ignore the looming absence in space that these lenses create...
...because of their focal length compression.
You're hung up on linear perspective, which is only a percentage of all things that go into making an image. Feel free to learn about it within context of making a photograph by clicking here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)
You can make pixel peeping crops all day long, but when you're ready to apply this information, you'll find out that lens length directly affects the compression of your image.
Last edited:
Wow I'm sorry but either you didn't actually read what he did or completely misunderstood it.
The point he was making was that he used THREE DIFFERENT focal lengths, 24mm, 70mm and 200mm and the compression/perspective (the size of things in the background) was EXACTLY the same. Why? Because his camera didn't move at all. The fact that he cropped the pictures was just to emphasize the point. We're not talking about the framing we're talking about the compression. The reason why the same framing, uncropped, taken with a 24mm, would have the background much smaller is BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO MOVE MUCH CLOSER with that focal length to get the same framing. The perspective distortion is caused by distance from your subject, NOT FOCAL LENGTH. HE PROVED that.
Why is there always some old timer named frank that thinks he knows more about photography than he does.
I'm sorry you're so upset about being wrong.
You're essentially creating a topic and arguing with yourself. You're stuck on linear perspective. Why do you think people use foot zoom in conjunction with angle of view? Because they create different images. I'm far from wrong, you're just unfortunately confused in understanding how it all comes together.
I make my living with photography. In doing so, knowing how these things work and applying that knowledge is kind of important.
Ok then what the hell are you talking about? What is linear perspective? Because I am talking about both compression and how objects in the background can appear much larger. The fact is, focal length does not matter, only distance.
Are you disputing the fact that compression only depends on distance to the subject (plus background distance) and NOT focal length?
I just looked it up
http://www.steves-digicams.com/know...s/what-is-linear-perspective-photography.html
and that's exactly what I've been talking about!
"Linear perspective is the answer to why telephone poles look smaller when they are farther away from us in real world. "
Because the guy in that topic I linked to clearly showed that focal length didn't matter one bit, objects in the background were the same size and appeared the same distance away from the subject. I don't know what the heck linear perspective is.
All I want you to do is answer me this question
When we are talking about the size of objects in the background relative to the subject (whether or not a tree appears small or lifesize), what does it depend on? Distance to subject, or focal length.
Because *I* said distance to subject and you said it was so much misinformation. Now that you've been shown to be wrong you're leaving. Ok.
Your own link says you're wrong. Here's the link, fixed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)
And here's what it says about compression:
"Perspective distortion takes two forms: extension distortion and compression distortion.."
"Perspective distortion [ie, compression distortion] is determined by the relative distances at which the image is captured and viewed.."
"Perspective distortion [ie, compression distortion] is determined by the relative distances at which the image is captured and viewed.."
Nailed it.