Lens Compression Doesn't Exist - Here's Why

Read the full post here: fstoppers.com/architecture/ho...
To save 10% on your first purchase with Squarespace visit:
www.squarespace.com/fstoppers
📸15% off our Professional Photography Tutorials: Use Code KZbin
➡️fstoppers.com/store
🦸‍♂️15% off our photo course The Well-Rounded Photographer featuring 8 different professional photographers: Use Code KZbin
➡️fstoppers.com/product/well-ro...
Subscribe to the Fstoppers KZbin Channel:
➡️kzbin.info...
Our Gear: 📷 and 🎥Workflow Recommendations:
🥰Our Favorite Gear
➡️fstoppers.com/fstoppers-gear-...
🎸Music in our videos🎶
Artlist.io
➡️bit.ly/36hgJal
Epidemic Sound
➡️bit.ly/3aaE7GJ
💻Software📀
Adobe Creative Cloud
➡️ bit.ly/3hjVXdE
Luminar Neo
➡️ skylum.evyy.net/M6RAM
Capture One
➡️ captureone.38d4qb.net/NO29q
🛒🏪🛍 Support Fstoppers by shopping at:
B&H Photo and Video
➡️ www.bhphotovideo.com/?BI=6857...
Amazon
➡️ amzn.to/3hkTEXS
🤳🏻Follow Fstoppers on Instagram:
➡️ / officialfst. .
Follow Lee and Patrick's Puerto Rico Instagram:
➡️ / fstopperspr
There is a common misconception about lens compression amongst photographers. In this video, Fstoppers takes a range of lenses, from 15mm to 1,000mm, to explain in two examples what's really happening.

[@esmfamil5086]

I'm never taking selfies again. I knew my nose wasn't that big.

[@aliramirezruiz3481]

IKR those wide angle front facing cameras are never flattering on noses.

[@robbykidman]

finally im confident again about my nose ;)

[@dashhill443]

@@Lunaluvskitties join the club lol

[@animeeverwide9472]

I thought my dick was that big 😔👌

[@GeorgesonOfficial]

@@animeeverwide9472 Lmfao

[@arminf.1195]

OMG thanks so much guys, I now know what a gazebo is!

[@gaweyn]

Armin Farhangpour I still have no idea what you are talking about. You are distorting the perspective of this video.

[@AceDeclan]

This video is actually dead wrong. The reason why the cropped photo looked the same was because he was taken in the center of the lens which is the flattest part of the lens. Take a far reaching photo of him in the corner of the frame, and THEN crop it. You’ll see a completely distorted photo. The reason why zooming in works is because it focuses on the center of the lens which is the flattest part. This entire video is wrong, and just plain silly.

[@JJ_Khailha]

Lens compression may not exists but does a gazebo exist if you zoom in all the way through it?

[@magellanicspaceclouds]

@@JJ_Khailha If a tree falls in the forest...

[@Ra-Hul-K]

LOL.. well, we learn something new everyday.. a while back i was searching what these kind of structures in gardens and parks are called.. it took some time for me to find the term 'gazebo'

[@fjaajf]

Finally, a good explanation of the "lens compression"

[@emielzier]

Finally , a good comment that contradict the comment..

[@AceDeclan]

This video is actually dead wrong. The reason why the cropped photo looked the same was because he was taken in the center of the lens which is the flattest part of the lens. Take a far reaching photo of him in the corner of the frame, and THEN crop it. You’ll see a completely distorted photo. The reason why zooming in works is because it focuses on the center of the lens which is the flattest part. This entire video is wrong, and just plain silly.

[@DawidMilczarek]

@@AceDeclan Video was about lens compression, not lens distortion.

[@AceDeclan]

Dawid Milczarek it’s the same thing genius.

[@DawidMilczarek]

@@AceDeclan Every dog is an animal, but not every animal is a dog.

[@MatthewVandeputte]

I've been saying this for years! Even getting into arguments with people who would get so upset about it claiming I was wrong. Thanks for making this video.

[@usernamemykel]

YTuber Mike Browne did a similar tutorial, emphasizing that it is the distance between the subject and the camera lens that makes the difference (while keeping the subject the same size in the viewfinder for each shot, as done here.)

[@j.r.1030]

As someone that did loads of architectural photography for years, THIS IS EVERYTHING. Camera placement must be done BEFORE focal length selection. Focal length should be selected based on how you want to crop what you see with the naked eye. Period. Thank you for this.

[@StevenErat]

This is so ridiculous. Everybody knows this information. What are you saying, you don’t need zoom lenses, you can just shoot everything with a wide angle lens.

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

I am not sure about that, but you may want to check out SquareSpace first, for just a few bucks a month you can design websites yourself!

[@drasiritzbir]

This was inevitable, but it is great nonetheless! :-D

[@alex0589]

10/10

[@smahatma]

This is a diss video directly to Theoria Apophasis / Ken Wheeler

[@TB1611]

I knew I would find this Comment at the top

[@learningcameras]

Thank you!!! I had this wrong for forever and it was a few years into my photography journey before I figured it out. Great explanation and examples Lee!

[@AceDeclan]

Dan Watson This video is actually dead wrong. The reason why the cropped photo looked the same was because he was taken in the center of the lens which is the flattest part of the lens. Take a far reaching photo of him in the corner of the frame, and THEN crop it. You’ll see a completely distorted photo. The reason why zooming in works is because it focuses on the center of the lens which is the flattest part. This entire video is wrong, and just plain silly.

[@joeltunnah]

@@AceDeclan whoosh! This whole video went right over your head. Pro tip: get off the internet, and take some photos.

[@pbm___000]

@@AceDeclan So if I understand, you're saying: don't believe your eyes (what the video clearly demonstrated), but believe what you tell me?

[@AceDeclan]

@@pbm___000 what do you mean don’t believe your eyes? Do you not understand what I’m telling you? I literally said go and try this and see how he’s wrong. I really just don’t understand how someone can think this video is correct. ​The reason why zooming in changes the image is because lenses are not flat, they are spherical in nature. Like a half sphere. Their purpose is to bend light, to fit in as much as possible into the image. So when you zoom the camera is only focusing on a small part of a spherical object (the lens) making the light enter through a much flatter surface. Giving you a more accurate representation of what’s really there. If you don’t understand that mate photography is not for you.

[@wongwu]

You continue to miss the main idea of this video even after commenting numerous times throughout the years. Your tireless incomprehension is the stuff of legend.@@AceDeclan

[@Colmkeating15]

This channel has improved so much this year. Really loving it. Great work guys.

[@ErickRedcloud]

Been trying to explain this to other photographers (my first degree is in engineering). I am glad you could explain it MUCH better than I could.

[@rrijnders]

Great explanation and examples, but I always learned it as "background compression" not "lens compression". Seems a bit more accurate and removes some of the controversy.

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

There wouldn't be any controversy if these self proclaimed photographers would take a course on photography 101, especially the one offered by Prof. Marc Levoy from Stanford.

[@bersK00]

What does it cover? The physics behind photography or some really basic stuff like ISO and Aperture?

[@fotojobo6719]

Tomato / tomato

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

It covers photography from both the art and technical sides. Very informative and in my opinion very essential.

[@JohnRavolta]

Thundertastic yes. Marcs class covers the physicis of photography quite well. Its an amazing course.

[@keithbrown454]

Wonderfully EXPLAINED!! It's about time someone (photography channel) clears up this subject in a concise, easily, and a understandable way. There is so much conjecture on the internet and from multiple photography channels about this subject that is completely nonsense. Thank you sir and keep up the extremely good work.

[@dajusta87]

They call it background compression, which is about perspective and subject distance.

[@andrekaled]

Exactly. I don't even thought there were any needs of explanation

[@clydecrashcup9962]

What they call it is stuff they have made up from not understanding what it is. It is Dolly Zoom Parallax. So I say call it DZP.

[@usernamemykel]

@Graham Rathbone I had a distant relative who was compressed by a bus.

[@usernamemykel]

@@clydecrashcup9962 Is that like Dolly Z. Parton?

[@Magnum-Farce]

usernamemykel I had a friend who was hit and the entire left side of his body was destroyed - But he's all right now.

[@MadsPeterIversen]

Really great video and the best explanation I've seen of this phenomena. Actually something I thought about as late as earlier today! I'd suggest calling is perspective change :)

[@dawsoncjames]

Mads Peter Iversen maybe, although moving one step to the left is also a perspective change.

[@touchaingyang9828]

Isn't it that any sort of movement would be considered a perspective change, anyways? It's the term I use for this effect, and occasionally 'perspective distortion' when trying to be more specific.

[@dawsoncjames]

TCK Y I think you're right; 'perspective distortion' is almost spot on.

[@AceDeclan]

This video is actually dead wrong. The reason why the cropped photo looked the same was because he was taken in the center of the lens which is the flattest part of the lens. Take a far reaching photo of him in the corner of the frame, and THEN crop it. You’ll see a completely distorted photo. The reason why zooming in works is because it focuses on the center of the lens which is the flattest part. This entire video is wrong, and just plain silly.

[@Camrographer]

Thank you for the video. Essentially, perspective distortion is a product of the ratios between subject, object and all the distance in between. Then there's field curvature, barrel/pincussion distortion of the lens and lastly paralax. That's why the stitching software couldn't perfectly piece the images together.

[@kylestewart4444]

I love the compression/perspective distortion that you get when composing a shot with something like an 85 or 90mm lens. I'm still pretty new to photography and I never really knew what caused it but I knew I liked the way it looks. Thanks for breaking it down and explaining it so clearly.

[@ClasEricson]

Big thanks! Finally someone who understands simple principles of perspective and applies them to photography. There's too many videos where people tries to explain photography stuff with more or less self created ideas not understanding the nature science that's behind it.

[@MrAlElmes]

This really answered a question I had about using apsc mode on the a7iii vs another lens. I thought a disadvantage might be not getting as much compression.

[@justinfox3752]

Fantastic job explaining this! I was actually taught this in school with similar types of tests that we had to do ourselves, yet so many still didn't get it. It seems to be a tough idea for people to wrap their heads around.

[@AceDeclan]

Justin Fox This video is actually dead wrong. The reason why the cropped photo looked the same was because he was taken in the center of the lens which is the flattest part of the lens. Take a far reaching photo of him in the corner of the frame, and THEN crop it. You’ll see a completely distorted photo. The reason why zooming in works is because it focuses on the center of the lens which is the flattest part. This entire video is wrong, and just plain silly.

[@odprjo9016]

He is saying that indeed there is lens distortions but the perspective remains the same. Also when you zoom in, with a telephoto you zoom to the subject you want to shot. So for example if you wanted to zoom to something on the side you have to turn(!) your camera to that point and shot. In this case again replacing the lens with a wide one and cropping will give the same results. ( Because the subject is again in the center )

[@eljavix]

What a simple and awesome well condensed "out of the park" explanation of something so common...this rocks! congratulations guys...

[@AANasseh]

Dude, this was super informative for me, that after so many years of shooting, understood now this simple fact with your simple demo! I was sure it's associated with the focal length of the lens, but now I realize it's related to the subject to the lens distance! Thank you Lee!

[@artmaltman]

Best explanation of this phenomenon that I have ever seen. By far. Thanks!

[@woodnbobberworkshop]

It's photography...everything is perspective

[@zemudikat]

you know it

[@RonanTetsu]

not everyone does

[@AceDeclan]

This video is actually dead wrong. The reason why the cropped photo looked the same was because he was taken in the center of the lens which is the flattest part of the lens. Take a far reaching photo of him in the corner of the frame, and THEN crop it. You’ll see a completely distorted photo. The reason why zooming in works is because it focuses on the center of the lens which is the flattest part. This entire video is wrong, and just plain silly.

[@palmberry5576]

Daltira yes.. that’s how lenses work. If you want a field of view greater than 0, then the edges will be distorted

[@nikoolix]

@@AceDeclan Shut up. You pick one aspect that is wrong and then say "This entire video is wrong, and just plain silly.". So everything is black&white to you? It's all or nothing? The reason why wide angle lenses stretch things in the corner like you say, is because they're forced to do that to create a rectilinear projection. Sort of when you compare a flat world map with an earth globe. But he wasn't talking about things in the corner, he's showing how the center doesn't change. Many people are talking about the compression that telephoto lenses create, which is false, since it's about the distance. He just proved that, and it's correct.

[@aronisink1]

Wow. out of thousands of tips, tricks, tutorials that I have watched.. never heard anyone explain it in that way.. BRAVO...

[@chriseyrewalker]

yesss! thanks for making this video and clarifying. SPOT ON!

[@davidtracy223]

There's a reason why people use a nodal mount when doing panoramas. Parallax is a form of perspective distortion but it is due to the refraction characteristics of the lens. That's not to disagree with the full content of the video but rather your experiment with the bicycle. The bicycle image shot with a nodal mount wouldn't have the same perspective distortion due to the null of nodal points, and you would get an image that actually stitches together.

[@anthonycook2325]

omg dude don't you come in here with your actual knowledge!!! in all seriousness though think you for bringing this up you hit the nail on the head.

[@TangerineTux]

As far as I can tell, parallax has nought to do with refraction; it’s just an inevitable consequence of taking pictures from a different viewpoint.

[@Crewchief227]

This is a very interesting video, and proves a good point. As a fine art painter as my main medium I have studied perspective obviously a lot on my way to grad school. Say I'm setting a scene, and using standard two point perspective to compose such, the framing will always follow that multitude of size of subject compared to the background. Ie, the subject has a ratio to the background depending on the horizon line and the vanishing point. Thanks for the video it's not just applicable to photography, but art in general.

[@RobShootPhotos]

Thank you! I thought so. I heard two other KZbinr talk about compression but I saw that they were too close to the subject and it was distorting. You verified my thought of backing up and crop a little.

[@CJamesPhoto]

This was great! definitely helpful to get a better understanding of this :)

[@kurtlindner]

This was great! I did already get this, but many don't understand it, and it's important to understand this stuff to be able to take full advantage of every asset.

[@alanleung5290]

It's mainly called lens compression because the longer the lens the further you are from your subject(normally) so by having a longer lens it sort of forces you to go back further. You could just always crop a 24mm shot in super far then go for it haha

[@anthonycook2325]

resolution will be poor.

[@alanleung5290]

anthony cook wow you must be a genius or something😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@heitorpergher]

This was such a great explanation. Thanks a lot for the great work! Cheers from Brazil.

[@JJ-ew9lq]

This is an awesome explanation. Well done!! I am new to this. I just realized I can use this idea when taking family gathering dinner photos. The closer people get swollen and distorted. So now I can just set up the camera farther away and take the photo! Even zoom in if I want. Wow!

[@sabahbubbler]

I'm not a photographer, I'm more of a writer and maybe actor director. However, while I was learning perspective from one of Marshall Vandruff videos, he pointed out about vanishing points. Lots of books on perspective will tell you that it's wrong to put two vanishing points close together and make a distored image. Marshall then explained, it's similar to focal length. The closer the vanishing points, the more it's warped. It serves for various purpose. Like for horror style, intense alice in wonderland drawings, close vanishing points works well. Like Junji Ito or other artist that make that horrifying style manga, it works That's how I think of Lens I think. So if I use a wide angle lense on close up, it will give this serious heavy tone effect, I think

[@PaulRamen]

There is a depth of field difference that remains even at equal perspective between 200m and 24mm cropped right ?

[@alanleeimaging]

That was an excellent surprise tutorial for me. And it was so well made, too. Thank you so much!

[@brandydarling1]

I had never heard it called lens compression but in school it was ‘background compression’ also falling under the umbrella term ‘forced perspective’ so I feel like it becomes a semantics argument. Great explanation of how it works. Thanks.

[@alastairtheduke]

Except that if you think the lens is doing the distortion, you may go shell out a bunch of money thinking you're fixing something when all you had to do is back up

[@Infosmercial]

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?! Everyone knows this, we should all just shoot wide angle......Now that that is out of the way, fantastic video. Excellent explanation and something I honestly didn’t know. Keep it up!

[@salarycat]

Yes, exactly. Basically if you have a sensor with infinite resolution, a wide lens is the only lens you need.

[@alanleung5290]

You'd also need an insane computer to handle that infinitely large file haha

[@alex0589]

Salarycat if you dont care about dof yes ahah *buys 14mm*

[@MegaWeitzel]

A crazy fast wide angle to get any decent "zoomed" image

[@BubuSnow93]

Actually even with an infinite resolution sensor you couldn't do it because you would be limited by the diffraction due to the small physica aperture of the wide angle hehe

[@tmjcbs]

Or, more or less the reverse: if you have a lot of patience and good image stiching tools/skills, a telelens is all you need (and you don't need a sensor with infinite resolution in that case)

[@amitkrupal1234]

Finally someone with very simple way of explaining these & clearing confusions

[@hrishar]

Well described, nice and clear! Another way to think of it is that you can actually see the perspective with your eyes, before turning on the camera. Keep walking until the perspective looks right. Then think of what you want to include in your frame (=fov) and that determines the focal length.

[@Jones12ax7]

Very nice video! Clear and easy to understand. I see many arguments from those who dont believe man went to the moon because of diferent moon sizes in respect to astronauts. This video can explain what is really happening

[@toazel8679]

Jonathan Araujo It are just a bunch of conspiracy theories. Not really worth arguing with conspiracy theorists about something like that.

[@tripleceas]

I avoided this video for some reason. Then watched mads peter iversons latest video from an iceland glacier which made me want to watch it. Good stuff.

[@ciaragray2175]

I’ve always been confused by other’s explanations bcs they never made sense! Thank you so much for this video, I always thought it had to do with distance and not lenses.

[@glfclbs]

Great information as always!! Thanks for the continued info!

[@Bareego]

I prefer to call it background compression, as in pretty much all cases you do not want to crop if you can avoid it. It's useful as in the actual use of lenses it makes more sense. That it has to do with difference in distance is good to know but doesn't affect what you're doing unless you go pretty wide.

[@AceDeclan]

the reason why zooming in changes the image is because lenses are not flat, they are spherical in nature. Like a half sphere. Their purpose is to bend light, to fit in as much as possible into the image. So when you zoom the camera is only focusing on a small part of a spherical object (the lens) making the light enter through a much flatter surface. Giving you a more accurate representation of what’s really there. So yes, if you were to have a completely flat lens “lens distortion” would not exist at all. But that technology does not exist.

[@bananasandbass]

Yay glad to hear I’m not the only one who prefers correct physics terms over photography terms haha.

[@tHaH4x0r]

Very informative and excellent video, seriously one of the best on youtube in terms of quality, content and presentation.

[@bigbokiptd]

Great video! Thank you so much for all the effort

[@Ruud_Brouwer]

3:10 exponentially? I think you mean significantly

[@kirkelicious]

If this wasn't a video that got all anally attentive about semantics I would have just shrugged this off. Here it gave ne a good chuckle :)

[@LightW]

exponential is actually right because he is talking about the distance of the nose in relation to the distance of the ears... edit 1 Exponential, because the further you go away the less this "perspective compression" changes anything, if you gou closer the distorsions grow exponential. :) Edit 2 This is also why with wide angle every millimeter counts. From 15mm to 10mm is a huge difference, while no one gives a fuck if your lens is 200 or 210 mm :)

[@kirkelicious]

Actually, if the distance from nose to camera is dcn and the distance from nose to ear is dne then the ratio between the sizes they are rendered at is R=(dcn+dne)/dcn which is a hyperbola. Exponential functions come in the form y=a^x.

[@zemudikat]

+lars thirstyhoe ohhh i wonder waaay.. meibi bikoz 15mm is 50 porsent longah den 10mm? waw u gud ticha

[@LightW]

kirkelicious well technically if you look at a drawing of a hyperbola the curve opens up in an exponential way :) no offense though :)

[@MaximKachurovskiy]

Some say that gazebo is still growing.

[@usernamemykel]

...and some people are idiots...

[@soljafon]

And their name is @@usernamemykel

[@AdvaitThakur]

Excellent and I think it's the only way to show what different focal length would do to a picture. Great one!!!!

[@markus8282]

Exactly this I discussed with people for years. Quite hard to understand for folks which got teached that the lens does this. You are absolutely right!

[@Ram-lr6ud]

Cool, I actually learned something.

[@peter-vk8ts]

What I learned from this and other fstoppers videos is that this guy has a foot fetish. Put some fucking shoes on for the love of god.

[@syntaxerror8955]

pe ter, so you don't like feet, huh? What I learned from your comment is that you have a whitespace fetish. Remove some fucking space between "pe" and "ter" for the love of god. :-)

[@usernamemykel]

@@syntaxerror8955 THAT, is funny.

[@EDCGadgets]

Create a video with crop factor and how it effects the DoF on equivalent framing (portraits)! That's also an ENORMOUS misconception in the photography community!

[@FStoppers]

EDC Gadgets planning it now

[@peter-vk8ts]

would you please put some shoes and socks on for your next video, thank you.

[@Dmitriy_Poludin]

Thanks! That is what I’ve been looking for!

[@raiv-creative]

Exceptional video, it all now makes perfect sense, very well explained, many many thanks for this, just subscribed, will be looking out for more great content from you guys

[@ForTheLoveOfSuits]

Lee, I think you’ve misunderstood ‘lens compression’. What you explain is what people mean but just call it lens compression. It’s the relationship between the photographer and the subject using different lens focal lengths and the position you have to stand in to get the photograph. And I think you’ve tackled this subject before. Still an entertaining video though so I don’t care.

[@pizzasaurolophus]

except the focal lengths have nothing to do with it, it's the distance. You know when people say 85mm is the perfect focal length for a head and shoulders portrait? What they mean is the distance you are from your subject is the perfect distance for a portrait. The focal length you use only changes your composition/framing. Stand in the same spot and zoom to 100mm, now you've got a head shot, zoom out to 50 or 35mm and now you've got a half and full body environmental portrait. The distortion or "lens compression" is introduced by moving with your feet regardless of what focal length you use.

[@pizzasaurolophus]

You wouldn't do a head shot at 50mm though, because that would require you to move closer to your subject and cause distortion. If you wanted to use an environmental portrait and fill half the subjects body into the frame, you should use a 50mm. If you want to do a head shot, you should use 100mm. The point is focal length determines the framing, moving with your feet is what introduces distortion.

[@JediOfTheRepublic]

Well they are dumb

[@okaro6595]

No he has not. It is a very common belief that longer focal lengths have some special compression. Sometimes that is called medium format compression. One also may think that while 35 mm on APS-C gives same angle of view as 50 mm on full frame, the compression still is less like 35 mm on APS-C. When you have debunked half a dozen such comments on KZbin Videos you know.

[@duhast43]

Came here to bash. Leaving out with a fresh new “perspective” (huh)

[@kapurar]

Thanks for the video guys and the demonstration. One of the best I have seen on the subject.

[@TNrick]

Wonderful video, good information with excellent examples. Honestly, I was completely wrong in my assumptions on lens compression/perspective. Thanks for correcting up my misconception.🙏

[@alex0589]

I remember having a "woah" moment when i first learned this. It makes sense, lenses dont change physics.

[@DeusExAstra]

It's more just geometry than physics, but true.

[@AceDeclan]

This video is actually dead wrong. The reason why the cropped photo looked the same was because he was taken in the center of the lens which is the flattest part of the lens. Take a far reaching photo of him in the corner of the frame, and THEN crop it. You’ll see a completely distorted photo. The reason why zooming in works is because it focuses on the center of the lens which is the flattest part. Lenses do change physics because they are circular, and round. Not flat.

[@supergameaddicted]

Daltira So are your eyes dumbass.

[@AceDeclan]

supergameaddicted mmm no

[@okaro6595]

It was same for me, it was in the early 80s when I was reading some photography book. The

[@richardbradley2641]

Does it REALLY matter what its called ?just need to know what and when it happens and when to make use of it !

[@wazzupbeckham]

awesome that you guys took the time to talk about this type of topic

[@piotrwydmuch9413]

Thank you. Eye opener!!! I appreciate your hard work!

[@24Steevy]

Its correct, but actually the lens lens force you further or closer away, so trully the lens cause the perspective compression 😉

[@pizzasaurolophus]

a lens doesn't force you to do anything.

[@24Steevy]

of course it does :D If you have a wide angle lens you must go closer to your subject, if you have a long lens you must further, it's a fact not opinion :)

[@pizzasaurolophus]

No it isn't that makes absolutely zero sense. imgur.com/a/pvJoVY9 both of those photos are taken at the exact same distance from subject, one is just a wider lens. If you want to move with your feet from that distance, that's your choice but you're going to introduce distortion. You stand 10-12 feet from your subject for ideal proportions/distortion and choose a focal length for how you want to frame your photo. If you decide to move with your feet that's your choice and has nothing to do with your lens.

[@24Steevy]

ok, i see you don't understand :D Just one simple example: You can't make a full shape photo with a 200mm fixed lens from 10-12 feet, the lens is force you to step back, i can't explain you simplier maybe this time you understand :)

[@pizzasaurolophus]

again you misunderstand the entire concept in this video. You don't need to shoot with 200mm lens. If you want a full shape photo you should use 35mm. It's impossible to take a photo of a person with a 200mm lens without distortion. If you want to take a photo of your subject with distortion, that's fine, but the lens didnt "make" you do that, you chose to do that.

[@PostColorGear]

Yes. 100% Distance is everything. Like.....everything.

[@DeusExAstra]

To be more accurate, it's distance and the size/shape of the object being photographed. I think the term "perspective" is a good one because it takes both into account.

[@ChocoLater1]

I don't normally like videos on KZbin but today I have to make an exception over here. Finally som real talk about photography.

[@fabrizio-evans]

great work guys. really informative!

[@suednonymous8587]

Sure, distance is a determining metric, but I think there's a better explanation. The video (and both articles) get close, but don't specifically mention it, and there's a comment below that says "perspective is everything" (a great summary that offers no explanation). I'd say that angles are everything. When you look at a scene (whether with the naked eye, wide angle or telephoto) there's exactly one spot in the very center and everything else is off to the sides at some angular distance from the center. The angular distance is a function of geometry, not optics, and can only be changed by moving the observation point or objects in the scene. Changing focal length will change the field of view, not the geometry. The angular distance between objects, and therefore perspective and apparent compression, remains the same unless the observation point is changed. FWIW, this is similar to the apparent movement of dashed white lines on a highway. The ones that are well out in front of you appear to move slowly because their angular distance from the center of your field of view changes relatively slowly compared to the ones that are close to the front of the car, or right next to you, which appear to whiz by far more rapidly. Our perception of speed, size, and distance are all related to angular distance. There's another comment below from somebody who obviously doesn't get the concept at all, that has (so far) been liked by 250 similarly clueless people, saying the point is to just use a wide angle because a zoom or telephoto is unnecessary. That would be partially true in an imaginary world that wasn't subject to the realities of technology and physics, but we're stuck in a real world that has limitations. Even if it were possible to make a sensor that had a billion pixels diffraction would require the resulting image to be downsized considerably, and the real world resolution wouldn't be 50 times better than a 20MP sensor. There's no free lunch, so if you want an image of a cardinal that can be printed at even a modest size you either need to get close to the cardinal or use a telephoto lens so that the cardinal occupies more useful pixels. Most importantly the post completely misses the point that what we see depends on where we stand. Composition and angular distance can only be changed by moving.

[@joeltunnah]

April 2020: 372 people so far are having severe cognitive dissonance.

[@PenguinCrayon269]

it grows 15% through pandemic lol

[@DeusExAstra]

Good video. I do think a lot of people believe it's the focal length of the lens that causes this, rather than the distance and perspective. But the video here is 100% correct. I like the example of stitching the multiple closeup images... very effective.

[@ufarmvideo]

that is the most professional tutorial i ever watched!!! appreciate for knowledge!!!

[@i.e.sergio]

I think you could have just started with a discussion about FOV and shown a diagram with an isosceles triangle displaying viewing angle, and consequently real vs. projected size and how using longer lenses to maintain identical projected size as you back up requires a decrease in FOV and consequently increased distortion. This video is a bit too black box-y to me; cameras and lenses are not magic.

[@SimMaster]

Sergio G it has nothing to do with FOV. As you back up, your subject is getting smaller faster than the background is. It's as simple as that.

[@i.e.sergio]

SimMaster you're literally describing field of view, in a way. Real and projected sizes for subjects at different distances from the sensor do not vary linearly, yes, because a field of view that is larger is capturing objects in the background significantly farther away than what is phased perpendicular to us (because of the field of view); as the angle shrinks, background objects move significantly closer in relation to the sensor as projected because of their tangential spatial reference w.r.t. the lens.

[@SimMaster]

Sergio G sure that's mainly true, but all of that is happening because you are moving the camera. It has absolutely nothing to do with what length lens you are using. The point of the video is that it shouldn't be called "lens compression" because it only happens when you move

[@-grey]

This is like the physicists arguing that if nobody hears a sound it’s not a sound, it’s just a wave. Maybe there is no compression difference in theory, but in practice, his face looks stretched as fuck on the wide end. And that’s bad for portraits. It’s like knowing how to print audio information on a record, compared to what is necessary to operate a record player. Still I guess it’s nice to have the information out here.

[@SimMaster]

のぢGrey he's saying that the compression is caused by the distance, so it should not be called "lens compression"

[@anthonycook2325]

but when there is ZERO change in distance between the camera and the object and the only thing that changes is the lens, what is that called????????? because guess what Patrick is the same exact size in the 24mm picture compared to the 400mm picture. there's this word called "R-E-L-A-T-I-V-E" and no I'm not talking about space, time, and black holes. Relative is defined as "considered in relation or in proportion to something else."

[@SimMaster]

anthony cook it's called nothing. The background becomes larger because he is moving the camera further away from the guy. What's so hard to understand?

[@jaimeduncan6167]

のぢGrey but the point is : it’s just the lens, so if your lenses get stolen and you have just a very good 35 this video tell you: don’t dismay m, just keep the distance and crop your D850 files.

[@benjamin_parry]

anthony cook If there is zero change between the subject and camera position, this can be considered cropping when going from wide to telephoto. Hence crop factor on smaller sensor size cameras. Telephoto to wide angle could be seen as over scanning or extending the field of view. Either way the telephoto image will be a cropped view of the wide angle shot. This is demonstrated in the video.

[@PeelBat]

Such a good explanation of what's actually happening. That pano stitch was great.

[@BojanBojovic]

This and the one made by Mike Brown are the best videos on this planet explaining this subject people take so religiously. Thanks!

[@problemat1que]

Also, there's no such thing as "exponentially closer" lol

[@immatureradical]

Your analysis is almost as wrong as the misconceptions that you are trying to clarify: 1. Whether you call it lens compression or perspective distortion, people tend to refer to the same thing that exists. You say that focal length doesn't compress, but your distance from your subject does. But the whole point is that the distance from your subject is dictated by the lens you're using and the perspective changes accordingly. The thing is, we humans see things through a certain focal length and regard the perspective it gives us as "normal", so we consider a normal lens the one closely replicates that perspective. If we take a shorter lens, it sees a wider field of view or more things from the same distance and in order to achieve this, it makes perspective look more dramatic than how we see it with a naked eye; with telephotos, the opposite applies, which is what people call "compression". So the reason compression is a thing is that using a wide angle lens you get the same view but different perspective than simply moving further to include more things, while using a telephoto will give you a different perspective than simply moving closer to your subject. 2. The fact that many people seem to think that a cropped photo of a wide lens has a different perspective than of a photo taken with a telephoto lens doesn't negate that compression is a thing. Your example about cropping conflates things further. When you crop a photo taken with a wide angle lens, you get the same compression as with a telephoto lens because you're essentially using your wide angle lens as a tele. By cropping, you're using only a portion of your sensor, so you get a smaller sensor and your lens is now a tele for that sensor size, so why would you get a different perspective from another tele? Conversely, if you stitch 10 photos that you took using your 85mm lens, the perspective looks the same as with using a wide angle because you're effectively having a sensor that is 10 times larger, and for that sensor size, 85mm would be considered wide angle. Confused enough?

[@SimMaster]

This is probably the stupidest shit I've ever read. The point is.. the compression ALWAYS exists in reality. You just can't see it because it's far away. The tele lens let's you see it up close in better resolution. It doesn't matter what lens you use. The compression only changes when you physically move around. That is the point.

[@GabeCuello]

THIS SOLVED ALL MY PROBLEMS!! Lol, ok, more clearly, I have been wanting to get a prime lens that gives me bokeh but also creating distance from the subject without being so far away. Especially for vlogging outdoors. This helps put things in perspective and with my decision making process. By the way, I use a micro 4/3 camera. Thanks!

[@binanaha3509]

This video really helps my study. Thankyou!

[@anthonycook2325]

I'm sorry but I do not think you understand what you just did in your own video. A change in framing IS NOT perspective distortion. The fact that the images perfectly align and the same size in a cropped in version of Patrick at 24mm compared to the non-cropped version of Patrick at 400mm proves lens compression does exist. The confirmation of THIS FACT is that you stated you DID NOT CHANGE the physical location of the camera sensor after taking pictures with the 24mm and 400mm lenses. It's pure contradiction that you stated the lens was not the cause of this difference but distance was EVEN THOUGH YOU NEVER CHANGED YOUR PHYSICAL DISTANCE. The lenses most definitely caused the changed due to the phenomena called "MAGNIFICATION." How can you have a change in distance when two objects have not physically changed distance from each other? A crop SHOULD NOT change the physical size of the elements contained within a photo relative to its FOV & area this would be going against physics. A crop is magnification; perspective is a physical change of location which is not the same as FIELD OF VIEW. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnification please read "Typically, magnification is related to scaling up visuals or images to be able to see more detail, increasing resolution, using microscope, printing techniques, or digital processing. In all cases, the magnification of the image does not change the perspective of the image." After NOT MOVING the camera, taking pictures at 24mm and 400mm, cropping in on 24mm picture, aligning the images, discovering the image are the same size relative to their FOV, and NOT discovering a change in physical size or transformation of Patrick then you should have ended the test and learned lens compression is real. Perspective distortion is the reason why Tilt-Shift and Perspective Control lenses are made for architecture photography. You see those photography are experiencing an actual distortion in their image that's causing the image to be physically out of place. Do I need to continue about your flaws with the bicycle portion of this video?

[@arachnophilia427]

anthony cook this might be one of the most confused things i've read on the internet. if he changed the lens but not the distance, and compression stayed the same, well it's not the lens now is it? you're complaining that he didn't also move -- the point is precisely to show that it's the movement that matters, not the focal length.

[@SimMaster]

What the fuck did I just read

[@anthonycook2325]

@arachnophilia. Lens Compression is caused by the phenomena of MAGNIFICATION. Increasing magnification WILL NOT change the size of the objects inside the picture. There is a direct relationship between the objects size and the increase of magnification. I'm going to quote you. "if he changed the lens but not the distance, and compression stayed the same, well it's not the lens now is?" 1. Lee changed the lenses 2. Lee DID NOT change the distance of the cameras sensor away from Patrick 3. compression DID NOT stay the same4. IT IS THE LENS because of magnification. Magnification causes compression. focal length is defined as "The distance between the center of a lens or curved mirror and its focus." when people make the comment "Zoom with your feet," for prime lenses compared to a zoom lens. There's a big problem here; the problem is the change in framing of the image and a loss of resolution because of the lack of magnification.

[@SimMaster]

anthony cook magnification does not change the compression. It's distance

[@anthonycook2325]

explain it.

[@virusheat]

It's one of the useless facts that doesn't do any good to your photography. Another one is that full frame doesn't give you shallower depth of field. The only reason why anyone who's trying to tell you these kind of useless junk is only for showing off.

[@flyairlie]

Joe S To a great extent I agree with you Joe. In that the terminology will not alter the photography process. However I found this video to be very useful, in the way that it helps photographers to think alike 👍🙂.

[@arachnophilia427]

on the contrary, understanding what factors control various aspects of your image lets YOU control those aspects directly.

[@SimMaster]

Yeah because it's such useless junk to understand why things actually work, and why not to spread wrong information.

[@anthonycook2325]

oh boy........

[@ainouta123]

My exact thought when I'm just trying out my camera when I first started out filming. But at that point of time nobody seems to be mentioning the fact that a 24mm vs a 105mm, the image/video distortion I get while maintaining the exact same distant is almost exactly the same if I digitally zoom in with the 24mm.

[@Rawteeth]

Thank you for your video! I had s hard time understanding when my teacher explained it to me

[@conradsenior5843]

Absurd he bothered to make a video on this.

[@RSP13]

I'm glad he did. When 50% of photographers wrongly answer a simple question on a poll, it's time to help to elucidate things.

[@reytampubolon6390]

Thanks for the explanation in this video. Now i‘m leaning towards full frame

[@Florlist]

This is so helpful to understand FOV in terms of drawing also Thank you!

[@hzubovi1]

Thank! Could you now do a video comparing sensor size from the smallest sensors to the medium format ones while maintaining the same look

[@AndresCuervoArt]

Excellent video, this is also the reason why medium format has shallower depth of field, as you have a bigger sensor you have a bigger area thus can get closer to subject to take the same portrait.

[@okaro6595]

No no no. They have shallower depth of field because the focal lengths are longer.

[@Ram.Saketh]

Amazing video. Thanks, i really have a new understanding of this phenomenon. Learnt this after years of pursuing photography so it is clear that learning never stops. Thanks once again for effort to make this video and help people overcome these myths!

[@AceDeclan]

This video is actually dead wrong. The reason why the cropped photo looked the same was because he was taken in the center of the lens which is the flattest part of the lens. Take a far reaching photo of him in the corner of the frame, and THEN crop it. You’ll see a completely distorted photo. The reason why zooming in works is because it focuses on the center of the lens which is the flattest part. This entire video is wrong, and just plain silly.

[@johnguillaume5919]

Well done. I kind of knew this but now I understand why. Keep it up

[@DerBARS]

Thank you! This helped me a lot! 👍🏻

[@PaulKentSkates]

This is one of the better examples of this phenomenon on KZbin.

[@stanchung69]

Thnk you for the video. I always thought lens compression was an effect of the long lenses stacking things in terms of perspective. Agreed with with everything you said.

[@ValmisFilm]

Love it! I argued with some of my friends about this and they did not get it for a while. Now at least I can give this video.

[@ShimonGaliley]

Wow, I never really put this together. Thanks!

[@tristanrujano]

I was not expecting this to be legit or informational.. But I have learned so much just now

[@HrPedrosak]

LOVED this video! I learnt a lot.

[@sandeshshrestha134]

Some photographes don't know anything any pretend like they know everything...but when I start watching ur videos damn I've changed my concept upon whole thing about photography . U have a great research..everyone should suscribed ur channel

[@SaturdayNightMonster]

Well explained! Ive been suspecting that that was actually the case for a long time but you nailed it. So i guess an 85mm lens is all you need for those zoomed in travel landscape shots provided you have enough lens and sensor resolution. Now i can leave my 400 at home :).