Lens compression DOESN'T REALLY EXIST - But it doesn't really matter either...
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 жов 2024
- INSTAGRAM: dpmphotographs
MERCH: teespring.com/...
PATREON: / davemckeegan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Music from Epidemic sound: Sign up for your 30 day free trial here: bit.ly/2FbWbTI
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please consider supporting the channel by making purchases through my Amazon affiliates: geni.us/Affiliate
My Gear:
Sony A6400 - geni.us/SonyA6400
Viltrox 23mm - geni.us/Viltro...
Boling P1 - geni.us/BolingP1
Sony A7III - geni.us/A7IIIbody
Tamron 28-75 - geni.us/Tamron2...
Irix 11mm - geni.us/Irix11
Sony 55mm f1.8 - geni.us/zeiss55f18
Sony 85mm f1.8 - geni.us/Sony85
Dave, you make some of the most interesting photography related videos on UA-cam. I really hope you'll get more subscribers, you deserve it.
Thank you very much Andrei :)
I never took compression to be in the literal use of the word, but the word is an easy way to describe a certain look that telephoto lenses provide. It can be thought of as a handy expression.
The lens themselves don’t give you the look. It’s the distances they cause us to be from our subjects and us having to zoom in bringing everything closer in the frame. It’s all ultimately down to distances. Distance from camera to subject, subject to background and camera to background.
Now I’m waiting for a wide angle F0.167 lens 😂😉
I think we all are :D
All I could keep thinking is "This cow is small, but those cows out there are far away..."
Yep, that thought hit me pretty early on in this clip
Haha me too
FECK!
I never understood why people get confused by this. I assumed that when people say "compression" they just refer to angle of view / perspective. Similar to when people talk about equivalency of focal length when switching sensor size. In that they're talking about field of view and not the distance between the sensor and entrance pupil (since that's a distorted metric of little use to a photographer unless he's hand building his own lenses).
I think it was Three Blind Men and an Elephant who said that with high megapixel medium format cameras, hypothetically you could just shoot everything with a wide-angle lens and then crop afterwards.
It's all just a matter of perspective ;-)
Great thumbnail. And an awesome demonstration.
That thumbnail is hilarious!
I love it. I’ve posed the same argument (when you said that hypothetically with the right sensor and lens we could make telephoto lenses obsolete) for crop vs full frame- When people say that with the right lens you can make full frame obsolete, sure you COULD get the look of a full frame 50mm F1.2 by using a crop sensor with a 30mm F0.75, but you can’t get a 30mm F0.75 so we just use a bigger sensor to get that look... In a universe with hypothetical cameras we can do all sorts of stuff 😂
Exactly, in the hypothetical universe we're all using a 8-800mm f0.1 pancake lens ;-)
I really loved this video! It explained a fundamental and fascinating principle of photography (depth of field) in an exceptionally clear manner. A great one, Dave!
Thank you Ivan, glad you enjoyed it
An excellent reminder that photography is a very technical activity, often described with imprecise artistic shorthand terms.
A portion of the same discussion of the differences (or not) between full frame and crop sensors. A lot comes down to where you plant your feet and what focal length (field of view) you select.
Also, clean your room 🙃
Wow, I've never noticed that, I was sure the field of view really changed the perception (I knew _some_ phisics behind it, but I never gave it the slightest thought).
Also, an interesting door location.
like before i even started the video, the thumbnail is awesome!
Thank you :)
You're not supposed to disturb a sleeping pupper!!!!
I'm 8 years into photography and never knew that. I was always under the impression that "compression" exists.
I fine kettle of fish you got me into, Ollie. I think this was excellent, and I only faded once. But It's very late. People fade for various reasons. The best one is you have a question at some point, it doesn't get answered, but the show goes on, then you play catch up. Adding a seemingly apparent but not real exception to the rule may be in order. The very last shot of THX 1138, for instance, where an insane telephoto is used as Robert Duvall surfaces to see the sun for the first time, and It's about 6 times his height. They must have had the camera 200 yards behind him and used the longest lens in town. In fact, that whole film is a class in lens selection.
What brand of scotch are you giving Rusty to make him sleep so soundly? Enjoyed your video very much.
"Old Dog" 😂
He's on a cocktail of 'age' + 'long walks' with a side of 'couldn't give a damn about cameras' :D
A good demonstration, thanks.
This is what I always perceived as being "Lens Compression": Images taken of the same subject, with *varying distance to the foreground subject* to keep it at equal size, regardless of focal length. In those situations, the background *does* appear larger.
As explained, with images, on www.slrlounge.com/lens-compression/
Never say never.... it could happen and to some extent already does in phone cameras. Great content as usual and not a waste of time at all. I think "telephoto compression" is just a phrase and you defined it well; change your lens to get that effect at full resolution.
Well, you beat me to my own future video subject. I studied 2-point and 3-point perspective drawing as an art student. Every time I hear "telephoto compression" I want to scream.
why? that's what it's called and when you mention it, everyone know what it is
@@Zakna did you watch the video? The point is, the lens doesn't compress anything. It's perspective based on the distance of subject(s) and background to the camera and to each other. Using a telephoto lens requires greater distance from the subject than using a shorter lens to frame the subject the same way within the frame. That distance also puts the background closer to the subject relative to the camera. That's what causes the appearance of "compression".
@@JohnDrummondPhoto haha that wasn't even my point... lol
@@JohnDrummondPhoto Do you think that people believe lenses are really squishing the physical world? Nobody believes that but it does make the background appear closer when the shot is composed properly thus appearing to compress the background. Sometimes teaching something with one word is better than a 10 minute video. Sure, it's great to understand what's really happening but in the end it doesn't change the quality of your photos.
@@GrantMcWilliams each to his own. As I said, I learned how perspective works as an art student. That helps me compose my photos and pick the appropriate lens more purposefully. It doesn't make it right for everyone, but it works for me.
This is is most useful photography channel. Thank you. (Please do the Sigma 150-600 on a Sony body review sometime in the future. You mentioned it couple of months ago. It would be really useful).
Similarly, full frame cameras do not produce more bokeh. Whether you’re using a full frame camera or crop sensor, the bokeh produced is the same. The photo is just more cropped in on a crop sensor camera.
Useful and informative. Nice dog😊 Thank you.
I knew it! Just a few minutes ago i saw a review of leica Q3 in which the reviewer saying that 'eventhough the high megapixel sensor crops to provide decent images, doing that to give equivalent different focal lengths with a 28 mm lens is not at all the same and lens compression is absent on those . And i was like.. No, its kind of the same...!
The idea of a high resolution sensor in a fixed lens camera that can digitally crop to imitate different focal lengths like the Q2 and Q3 is going to be the future for the everyday carry cameras. I believe next x100 from Fuji will follow this same idea.And there are rumors already.
Mind boggling stuff........................I think I will need to strain it through my grey matter a few times to fully understand it, but I got the jist of some of it. Nice work.
Sometimes you don't need a very small DOF, so cropping from a wide angle image can work. But I think what would put me off is the affect on workflow - you have to create that composition in post and it's an extra task, rather than creating it in camera and being able to see as you do it and take another photo immediately if you're not 100% satisfied.
Cropping in post is essentially the same as using digital zoom in camera, but I'm not keen on that either because that's irreversibility throwing away pixels from the sensor.
I think what I'd want that as far as I know doesn't exist is a RAW format that includes digital zoom information based on in-camera digital zoom. Probably just as four extra integers in the file to identify the positions of opposite corners of the cropped image. Then by default raw processors would throw away everything outside that rectangle, but if you wanted to look outside it and change the composition in post you'd still be able to.
Maybe a good way to do this 'reverse brenzier' would be to have composition guides turned on in camera, e.g. rule of thirds, and compose the image you want within the central 9th of the image area, then use a preset in post to crop down to that. Would turn e.g. a 24MP 50mm f/1.4 into the equivalent of 2.7MP 150mm f/4.2 . 2.7MP is not impressive for a camera but it's still more than full HD and fine for most web uses.
Think I might try that, but it still leaves the problem in post of how to find the images that were intended to be cropped that way.
Great video Dave, thanks!
Brilliant! Thank you!
Splitting hairs. I've heard this explanation several times over the years, and its information as useful as explaining how many lens elements and groups are in a metal tube as a way to justify a photograph's appearance. Yes, if you compare an image taken with a telephoto vs a wide-angle, at statistically relative lens/camera settings, an extreme crop of the wide-angle lens will appear similar to the telephoto image. But it's useless information to someone who is composing their photograph and using the appropriate lens for the job at hand. "Lens Compression" is an adequate term to teach and describe these perspective differences in two different lenses.
Thank you Dave! Very good explanation!
Maybe not one super wide and a 100 megapixels camera... But it does bring an argument for perhaps not owning so many focal lengths, but a few... And using tools like APS-C crop mode more the in-betweens. This, of course, if you're ok with the loss in resolution and aperture. I for one, like the idea of just owning a fast 35mm and getting 50mm(ish) with crop mode, and so on. It would be a matter of getting your preferred focal lengths as primes and using the in-betweens for focal lengths you might not like as much. Interesting video, thank you.
Didn't need the info but that thumbnail is too amazing not to give a watch.
Thank you ☺️
I've always understood compression to be a description of a specific perspective or look. In this case it will always remain true.
The look of the foreground background and subject looking very close to each other will always be a compressed look no matter what focal length or actual distance between them.
I'm trying to find another word to describe that perspective. Maybe “compressed look” or background compression is more precise.
Using the word “lens” in the name is misleading.
Brilliant!
Thanks for all the videos. I appreciate your science based approach 🙏😎
Very informative!
Thanks :)
Some say that you get it only with medium format which is even more wrong.
Actually quite interesting. Thanks!
Thank you Mr McKeegan Super video. :)
You're welcome Mr Bailey :)
What he says isn't going to happen, that photographers won't spend thousands and crop is mistaken. Look at the success of the Leica Q3 with 60mp sensor and Leica Q3-43. Of course, he made this video 3 years ago.
What you've explained is that lens compression DOES exist - because we can't change the nature of the equipment we use - just not for the reason people think it happens. Perhaps it should be called "lens compression EFFECT" in order to be more accurate.
400mp 5x4 camera might do the trick
Re-wording the phenomenon will just end in more confusion.
One could call it "Global Compression", "Perceptive ratio differentiation" or "The Dave phenomenon" but why make Photography more confusing?
Sure, when technology advances where we have to deal with huge image sizes like say a 1,000MP sensor could produce and all we then need is a steady hand, storage space and much better batteries.... there may come a time where one ultra wide lens can do the job (the cost would be astronomical lol).
We would also need glass that could resolve something like that.... so in short, it is pie in the sky.
I completely agree there is no point changing the name because it ultimately won't change how we shoot, like I said even if people had access to high enough resolution sensors that they could heavily crop in they would still want telephoto lenses to either not waste the sensor or to crop in even further.
I just think its good to understand the principles of what is actually going on
@@DaveMcKeegan you did a great job in showing the situation and keep up your great work. Always questioning and challenging keeps everyone re-thinking directions in Photography.
But that's the whole poit of getting an R5 or A1 ! To just walk around with one lens instead of all those heavy telephoto lenses.
No, that's what you pay an assistant to do. Step up to the light.
There is no spoon. :-)
It may give crazy results because our eyes are unable to do the same and the result is un natural to our brain.
You should buy a lint roller. Jokes aside, Good vid!!!
I have a lint roller ... what I need is a dog that doesn't shed ;-)
@@DaveMcKeegan i feel u
Panorama
Actually the car is slightly bigger in the left shot. Just saying.
Personally, I am all for academic exercises. They are much more useful in thinking of possibilities and eventualities than say their not too distant cousin: good old "historical hypotheticals," which I find not only academic but as they describe a scenario that never actually existed they nonetheless seem to hold the power to glamor the public at large into somehow believing that there was a chance of something which never actually occurred being somehow an eventuality worth considering.... or some such shit as that. The real nerds out there are about to pounce on me about asynchronous communications integral role in modern technologies and in particular the development of the home pc so I'll just shut up now 🤣
Hey Dave, I can see that you’re using the sigma 150-600 with the mc11, can you do a review showing us how’s the autofocus? Was thinking at a telephoto lens and the sony 200-600 is too expensive so the only variant I’ve got is the new sigma 100-400 but it’s 200mm short on the telephoto end than a 150-600 for example. Native lens or that combo with the mc11 is good enough? THANKS 🙏
I've got a few other projects already in the works but a review is definitely on the cards once I have time
....nowt better to do?
A7r4 can hit 240 megapixel with pixelshift
Good point, although pixel shift isn't always practical
People would do that in a second if it existed. lol
hahaha good job :)
This kind of thing is just click bait. You know perfectly well that the phenomenon people mean by lens compression is the use of a long lens and moving away from the front subject. In you example the car then looks larger relative to the light. Mark Gee made a great video using a super telephoto that showed people on a lookout some km away looking almost as big as the moon rising above them. You are welcome to come up with a better name than lens compression but don’t claim these illusions don’t exist just to get likes
I never said the illusions don't exist, I was clarifying that these are a combination of factors not just a single physical trait.
You and I might know perfectly well what this phenomenon is but I have seen and spoken to plenty of people who have argued to the point of aggression trying to claim that lens compression is an actual physical characteristic of a lens
@@DaveMcKeegan Sure but by producing a debunking video you effectively steer people away from a powerful tool. I think that the point of your video would have more power if you said what is conventionally meant by Lens Compression and how to make use of it
145. like and no dıslıkes
Unfortunately that's ended lol