Dan Cattermole
Dan Down - The Steampunk Womble
Once upon a time, Curt and myself took a visit to a panoramic tower near a village called Earls Croome just out of curiousity (about 12 months ago i think) No access was granted inside the grounds of this tower, the premissis was surrounded by a circular solid fence.
Right, lets get some pictures... too far back and the picture was ruined by this fencing, so no choice but to stick the tripod and camera peaking through it. To our suprise Curt stated he could not get the whole tower in the frame, okay, so I tried and succeeded without cutting edges off the tower which was situated about 15-20m from the camera...... anyway, from that day onwards I've always been under the impression that I had a wider coverage than Curts standard lens kit (canon 18-55mm (aps-c sensor)) with my 14-42mm Oly standard kit armed with the 4/3 sensor, untill a little experiment was conducted this morning to find out if and how much.
So heres how the experiment went..
First off we took a picture of Curts retro BMW in jpeg and no pp (by all means these photos are not creative and are for the purpose for this experiment to help myself especially to understand the spec of these wonderfull sensors thats present in our cameras these days). The tripod remained in the same position whilst the Canon and Oly were swapped over to take these following shots.
First the Canon at 18mm
Then the Oly at 14mm
Looking at the pictures revealed a suprising result that actually, the 'wide' angle isn't as noticable as I thought it would be. okay if your picky then you can see a little more on the Oly shot than you can on the Canon shot. but it was a fail.
So, I thought, lets take a picture of the street to get a better perspective of a wide angle coverage. Same again, tripod remained, cameras were swapped. upon looking at this results I thought I was doing something wrong, how could this be? why have I been under the impression that I had a 'noticable' wider coverage than Curt, because you'd really have look at the edges to see, that yes it was there but not as much as I'd hoped, from the indicator lens on the red car as reference to the furthest left (in both) to the peak of the house in the right thats visable in Oly and not the Canon.
Canon
Oly
I must admitt, at this point I was scratching my head.
Then, it clicked.... I took an important glance to the stop valve thats on the footpath and compared the both.
Right, BMW again.....Portrait. At this point I realised as we took pictures of the 'tower' (bieng the important word) I took the picture 12 months ago in portrait!!
So here are the results as follows, same again, NO cheating!
Canon
Oly
This is were my definition of 'noticable' had been swirling around in my head all this time, and even more so if the subject was to be further away. And in this photo I could confidently say it had a wider coverage in portrait (down to the sensor in the Oly bieng 4/3 the size!!)
Basicaly, as Hamish has stated regarding the specs of the 2 sensors. They are most definately correct. my 14mm (28) and Curts 18mm (29.16) However....... by only the skin of my teeth.. I do have a wider angle
haha!! but only by 1.16mm, but the theory stands correct hands down
I really enjoyed this experiment and it has educated me a bit more about sensors, obviously by looking into the differences and specs on the good old internet as well. This was a learning curve for myself and probably others too and thats what makes this forum a great place to discuss matters openly and honestly. And for those who haven't seen a the comparison of the aps-c and a 4 thirds sensor..... you have now!!
Many many thanks for reading.
Right, lets get some pictures... too far back and the picture was ruined by this fencing, so no choice but to stick the tripod and camera peaking through it. To our suprise Curt stated he could not get the whole tower in the frame, okay, so I tried and succeeded without cutting edges off the tower which was situated about 15-20m from the camera...... anyway, from that day onwards I've always been under the impression that I had a wider coverage than Curts standard lens kit (canon 18-55mm (aps-c sensor)) with my 14-42mm Oly standard kit armed with the 4/3 sensor, untill a little experiment was conducted this morning to find out if and how much.
So heres how the experiment went..
First off we took a picture of Curts retro BMW in jpeg and no pp (by all means these photos are not creative and are for the purpose for this experiment to help myself especially to understand the spec of these wonderfull sensors thats present in our cameras these days). The tripod remained in the same position whilst the Canon and Oly were swapped over to take these following shots.
First the Canon at 18mm
Then the Oly at 14mm
Looking at the pictures revealed a suprising result that actually, the 'wide' angle isn't as noticable as I thought it would be. okay if your picky then you can see a little more on the Oly shot than you can on the Canon shot. but it was a fail.
So, I thought, lets take a picture of the street to get a better perspective of a wide angle coverage. Same again, tripod remained, cameras were swapped. upon looking at this results I thought I was doing something wrong, how could this be? why have I been under the impression that I had a 'noticable' wider coverage than Curt, because you'd really have look at the edges to see, that yes it was there but not as much as I'd hoped, from the indicator lens on the red car as reference to the furthest left (in both) to the peak of the house in the right thats visable in Oly and not the Canon.
Canon
Oly
I must admitt, at this point I was scratching my head.
Then, it clicked.... I took an important glance to the stop valve thats on the footpath and compared the both.
Right, BMW again.....Portrait. At this point I realised as we took pictures of the 'tower' (bieng the important word) I took the picture 12 months ago in portrait!!
So here are the results as follows, same again, NO cheating!
Canon
Oly
This is were my definition of 'noticable' had been swirling around in my head all this time, and even more so if the subject was to be further away. And in this photo I could confidently say it had a wider coverage in portrait (down to the sensor in the Oly bieng 4/3 the size!!)
Basicaly, as Hamish has stated regarding the specs of the 2 sensors. They are most definately correct. my 14mm (28) and Curts 18mm (29.16) However....... by only the skin of my teeth.. I do have a wider angle
haha!! but only by 1.16mm, but the theory stands correct hands downI really enjoyed this experiment and it has educated me a bit more about sensors, obviously by looking into the differences and specs on the good old internet as well. This was a learning curve for myself and probably others too and thats what makes this forum a great place to discuss matters openly and honestly. And for those who haven't seen a the comparison of the aps-c and a 4 thirds sensor..... you have now!!
Many many thanks for reading.
