In article <b860c.104064$Hy3.56905_at_edtnps89>, m II
<ohmworkLEOPARD_at_spots.ca> writes
>David Littlewood wrote:
>
>> You cannot change perspective merely by changing lens. Only a change
>>of position will do that.
>
>
>A change in the angle of view is certainly a change in perspective.
>From the observer's point of view, an angle a hundred and twenty
>degrees between two objects and an angle of sixty degrees between the
>same two objects certainly qualifies as a change in perspective.
This is simply not true. Increasing the angle of view (i.e. by using a
wider angle lens) is seeing more of the same scene with the same
perspective. If you don't understand that, then you really need to give
some careful study to the theory of photography (or the meaning of
perspective).
>
>Look at the difference between a fish eye lens and a three hundred mm
>telephoto. Quite a difference in perspective, I'd say, even standing in
>the same position.
>
Take a photograph with an ultra-wide lens, blow it up many times, and
you will have a photograph which is identical (well, apart from any film
grain, lens aberration and lens resolution issues) with the one taken
with the long focal length lens. As in, identical, which includes, same
perspective. If you have never tried this, I suggest you do so.
BTW, I do not recommend you use a fisheye lens for this comparison, as
the design of a fisheye lens relaxes the rectilinear drawing constraint
and the images are not really comparable. This is also not a perspective
issue, it is a lens aberration issue.
