Lens Compression is a MYTH! How Focal Lengths Change Your Image Ft. Gerald Undone

[@geraldundone]

Loved this video! Such a funny edit. Thanks for having me on. 🤣🤓💜👍

[@BeckiandChris]

Gerald Undone thanks for being on with us! Such a good time and so many Lol’s!

[@JeahnLaffitteAdventures]

Gerald Undone Who knew you were such a goof! It’s nice seeing a 3rd person view of you. You’re not just a genius robot ;)

[@robmulally]

I like to call it compression due to perspective shift. To remind myself that is not the pack physical lens.

[@cooloox]

@@robmulally Lens compression is real. We use it all the time to control whether a background looks closer or further from our subject. These guys don't seem to know what lens compression means.

[@cooloox]

@@Robert99Powell Why, for claiming lens compression is a myth, but inadvertently demonstrating it's real?

[@thetimethatisgiven8839]

We need more Gerald and Chris moments. Two really brilliant guys breaking this stuff down is awesome!

[@RCodyWanner]

The way you edited this made it SO FREAKING fun - I’m smarter and my sense of humor has been sharpened. This is how school should be

[@BeckiandChris]

Cody Wanner thanks Cody!!! 🤣 had a fun time cutting in those troll bits

[@TimOnMain]

Saw the title and immediately got excited. People should understand that it's the DISTANCE from the subject that makes all the difference, not the focal length. The focal length just allows you to achieve the correct framing.

[@Corporis]

It's interesting how the focal length impacted the mood too. I felt like at 700mm, I was spying on Becki and Dunna with a telescope. But at 16mm I felt like I was sitting right there with them.

[@TtoTheOmarse]

Yeah, I agree. That's why I find portraits at a long focal length a bit uncomfortable.

[@AaronMello]

"I can see widescreen though" Take this thumbs up for that alone.

[@BeckiandChris]

Not many people got it I bet 😂

[@heyalex8597]

@@BeckiandChris I died when Chris said that LOL

[@woodypaul_]

I was about to comment the exact same thing. I'm glad someone beat me to it. 11/10 with the wit.

[@SlideWreckDan]

@@BeckiandChris as an Asian I have traumatic memories of that joke 😭 Dumb middle schoolers 😂

[@amaliakomperda3798]

I know, right?!

[@JeahnLaffitteAdventures]

The collab we never knew we wanted but are so glad we got! Thanks guys! And great editing Becki

[@zach.hanford]

This is a good demonstration of why shooting with, for example, at 35mm prime at f2.8 will usually look different than a 24-70 at 35mm f2.8. The focal length is the same between the two lens, but with the zoom you are less likely to reframe by moving your location(and as a result your perspective).

[@chrisbowpiloto]

This edit is one of the most fun that I have watched in a long time. I am sure it was a nightmare to edit, the the result is amazing!

[@darksideemt]

The perfectly cut in comments from Dunna and Becki are so spot on. Still a cool video. I also felt like it was a little Deadpoolish with wall breaks inside of wall breaks

[@dunnadidit]

Thank you for having me in your video of robot nerd things. Also... 14:53 ... you're welcome.

[@BeckiandChris]

Dunna Did It 😂😂 thanks for being in it with me!

[@geraldundone]

That's Canada's Ass.

[@EricWen]

This video, especially the first half made my head hurt multiple times. In a good way. Some of that stuff about the crop sensor I need to review a couple more times to fully understand but overall I got smarter! And no one talks about this, clears up a lot of confusion I had about aperture vs depth of field. Thank you guys!

[@CaryDean]

Kinda of a click bait title. Please don't take the Tony Nortrop route. Optical compression is a real phenomena. It's a flattened perspective caused by the use of a telephoto lens which changes the relational perspective of foreground and background objects. Buildings are a good example. It's the opposite with wide lenses though everything is still 2 dimensional. Also stated was something to the effect of the focal plane distance changes depending on lens used. The focal plane distance only changes if something is added between the camera body and the lens such as an extension tube. I usually wouldn't comment on such things but as "influencers" viewers (who often are enthusiasts not pros) look to you for accurate information. Sorry to be a Debbie Downer. I appreciate what you do. Keep making videos 👍👋

[@jackfitzwilliam9763]

nah dude, this is a property of physics. Seriously, take a wide angle lens and take a portrait of someone and do it again with a telephoto. crop the wide angle to the size of the telephoto and you won't be able to tell the difference (aside from loss of resolution). This is a super widely spread misconception. There a ton of articles on it explaining it and I tried it myself with a 14mm vs my 50 mm. There is literally no difference. Fstoppers did a great explanation of this. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z5PdeaFomLCqgqs

[@kustoo]

Super well done. Love this. Need to watch again to make sure I didn’t miss anything. Lol.

[@BeckiandChris]

Jacques Slade thanks Jacques! We had too much fun!

[@jenohogan9254]

This was probably one of the better videos of explaining compression, with solid visual examples. I learned about this in school, but only now did it totally clicked.

[@PostColorGear]

Yes. I know this video is old, but I have been on this lens compression myth kick lately. I found the FStoppers video I wanted to find and I had no idea that you guys made one too. Cool to see many cool people in one video! Well done, peeps!

[@Passe1]

Science and Cameras. Love it!

[@Shalaco]

From the vaults, 2019 style. Finally, something I can shamelessly watch while wrapping up all my 2019 projects.

[@Tacochamp123]

Don’t get me wrong. Gerald is pretty great on his channel, but he’s absolutely hilarious in this video in a way I’ve never seen in his vids

[@BeckiandChris]

ryan mcdougall he’s HILARIOUS in person, the 4 of us did so much laughing my stomach hurt after 😂

[@Tacochamp123]

He just uses tertiary in a conversion. Who does that? Amazing

[@TylerBoothGolf]

Sony Camera Camp looks amazing, especially being able to collab with some amazing creators! Excited to now binge SCC collab vids.

[@James_m7]

Thanks for the comparison! What mic is used Becki and Dunna? Thx!

[@OutdoorAuto]

Becki's commentary is on point.

[@ashj1979]

Where did you film this? It looks really nice. Great video.

[@alisinclair8529]

Great video and the edit was hilarious 😂 I'm now waiting for the Becki and Dunna getting ripped montage

[@robmulally]

Mad me laugh when they said that reminds me of my fitforphotography idea

[@Crazy123Nathan]

Great explanations along with the visual accompaniment. Brilliant work and something extremely useful to novices such as myself. Keep being your great and creative selves!

[@poksertv]

What kind of camp is this? How to there? I hear so much about this now from different KZbinrs

[@TallTreesClub]

Hey .. take a 400mm and shoot down 15 city blocks !!! The lights will look 20 ft. apart in the background. Something no wide angle lens can even begin to approach. In other words, there is "lens compression" clearly in that regard.

[@pixelpearlproduction538]

Like seriously guys I honestly don’t know what they’re on about....

[@jackfitzwilliam9763]

​@@pixelpearlproduction538 If you take a wide angle lens and shoot that city block, then switch out lenses but keep the camera in the same place, then crop in on the wide angle, it will literally look exactly the same (Besides loss of resolution). The idea that lenses cause compression is a widely held misconception. I tested this with my lenses and there is literally no difference. Fstoppers does a better video breaking this down. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z5PdeaFomLCqgqs

[@jackfitzwilliam9763]

This is a widespread misconception. The idea that lenses cause compression is false. It is literally called the "Lens Compression Myth". Google it and you can see loads of articles explaining it and proving it. If you took a picture of that city block with a wide angle and then took a picture with a 400mm lens with the camera in the exact same spot, then cropped in on the wide angle shot, it would look exactly the same (aside from loss of resolution). I've done this with my own lenses and its true. Fstoppers does a much better job at explaining it. kzbin.info/www/bejne/lYW3iYxniMpjm8k

[@okaro6595]

If you crop the wide angle image you get the same result - it may not be as sharp though. The whole concept of crop factor and the equivalent focal length is based on this.

[@msp77channel]

Chris wearing 700 fill down parka. Becki like t-shirt weather....that's the real circles of confusion....

[@TeachAManToAngle]

Where was this camp? Looks cool. I only know of a workshop like this on Mt Hood in Oregon.

[@BeckiandChris]

Teach a man to fish Montana!

[@TeachAManToAngle]

Becki and Chris - looks beautiful.

[@tillokhamdamov]

Even if it was a little bit difficult to understand it was full of fun to watch. Thanks a lot, I really enjoyed watching the video while having breakfast.

[@AdilAli-ur8mz]

this is a very interesting video for people that wanna know hoe focal lenghts can change the composition

[@ThisIsTechToday]

Ah! We finally get to see the other side of that little chat between Becki and Dunna! 🥳

[@BeckiandChris]

This is Tech Today the other very nerdy side 😂🤓

[@Grievas85]

Ahahahahah I love you guys. It's fun to see how much you enjoyed that chat 🤣😎

[@jayespinal]

Oh man this video is a great follow up to my recent upload. Love all the details on the variables in depth and look of each focal length! Keep it up!

[@JavierCerecer]

Love It! I learnt heaps. Thanks guys.

[@AsherDutchie]

i swear Camera camp happened last decade?? ill show my self out

[@BeckiandChris]

Haha not untrue

[@bubbivonbeijer5890]

First I agree with Gerald here, the editing was nicely done. Second, I like nerds and nerdy things, so A+ för the effort. Third, Chris, If you haven't already, you should check that cold issue out. Probably just low metabolism, but I was you. For years. Among my friends I was branded "Chilly Willy", from the cartoon, and we laughed about it. Then it turned out that I had a really serious condition. If you got a health insurance, you might think of using it. Better safe then sorrow, right? I apologize for the "sob story". Take care.

[@ronniechampagne2951]

I know this is irrelevant to the topic of this video, but how do you guys match your colors from the a7sii to the a6400? (if you’re still using it) I’m having a hard time with the different color sciences and if you guys made a video about that, I would be forever indebted. 🤗

[@BeckiandChris]

Ronnie Champagne it’s all in the primary correction! This video was shot on 4 different cameras (A73, A7r4, a6600 and a6400), it’s definitely time consuming to go through and correct them all so they match but worth it. Having a similar white balance in camera before you start showing helps a HUGE amount and then Learning how to use the scopes in your color software is key!

[@ronniechampagne2951]

@@BeckiandChris Thanks for the reply! Much appreciated

[@theCameraVille]

Very nice guys! Enjoyed the video.

[@CrackberryRon]

Gerald is the best guest for this kind of video = 📠

[@dominick3579]

I'm probably just as much as a nerd as Gerald and you guys because I made these observations on my own and decided to buy my latest lens, the Sigma 135mm 1.8 because of its 75mm entrance pupil. With a 200mm crop, it still produces a shallower depth of field than 200/2.8

[@okaro6595]

Yes slightly.

[@ScottandSeAnne]

I greatly appreciate the geekiness of this video 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

[@Cory.S]

Does it bring the background in?

[@DDHDTV]

this really changed the way I was thinking when I first learned it. As now I see more point in higher megapixel cameras. always knew you can crop it, but was always talking about “compression”. well, now I can just shoot with 50 1.8 and zoom all the way to 135mm and have the very same compression. i think a 35 1.8 is about a 135 f8, would have to do the math

[@hsdesignstudio]

These two create awesome videos! Very informative and easily understood by us less technical folks...plus it's still damn entertaining!

[@nikabika215]

If you’re keeping the aperture at the same stop wouldn’t the amount of light coming in remain the same no matter what focal length you use?

[@xavealda3255]

9:08 thats pretty much it, some people do it by moving the camera to compensate the frame which us wrong It causes the compression.-distance compression

[@JesusMartinezCreates]

So is “did it” his last name?

[@alexmilesg3]

Where were you guys? Didn't look like Canada on January 12...

[@BeckiandChris]

Alessandro Milite it was camera camp from September in Montana

[@Lyn_Tana]

Appreciate this video Guys. Great comps. Would also love to see more, utilizing 3rd party lens’ as comps...even though we are die-hard / exclusive Sony fans with our glass

[@jpdj2715]

Even nerdier. Important factor in depth of field, is the relation (as in fraction or %) between light passing through the glass directly versus light passing along a mass that blocks light. Light is "broken" upon passing from one density into another, but when passing along a mass it is "bent" (so, distorted). In a lens, the (edge of the) diaphragm is that mass. In a circle, circumference is a linear function of radius (F-number references diameter) where the area of the aperture (literally aperture means opening) is a second degree function of that radius. So, increasing aperture (opening - meaning a lower F-number, which is the denominator in a division to the focal length) means the fraction of "bent" light becomes smaller. Question is if the aperture effect (circle of confusion - a subjective thing) is different from stopped down a bit, compared to fully open, as we do not have the diaphragm in the optical path, but just the outer walls of the lens elements and the tube they are in. By the way, aperture and denominator, have you noticed that manufacturers write (e.g.) 50mm f/1.2 on a lens? And that this is actually mathematically identical to writing 50/1.2? Evaluate that, and you'll get the lens's opening's diameter for the set value. If you calculate both circumference and area for a sequence of apertures, you'll see that the area/circumference result change, from F/11 to F/1.4, gives a factor 8 increase (and F/1.2 gets you 9.2x or F/0.95 gives 11.6 times - when we plainly compare square millimeters to millimeters).

[@MattLeitholt]

That was fun! Is camera camp something done year round or just certain days?

[@BeckiandChris]

Matt Leitholt we shot this one at camp back in September!

[@ooonte]

Great video! Great edit!

[@TaskForceMediaGroup]

I am definitely in a circle of confusion, but I kinda of like it. Very informative video.

[@ChrisFranklinJr]

Solid video! You guys are great! 🤟🏾

[@TJolley]

Super helpful ! Definitely got some info I didn't know appreciate it 😄

[@ArthurRosaTV]

When it comes to outfit, Chris is on later fall and the other guys are just enjoying the summer time.

[@BeckiandChris]

Arthur Rosa he’s always cold!

[@artyomwunder9517]

Excellent video for us nerds out there 🙏

[@janetolch8129]

That was really good and helpful, thank you, educational for sure, lovely place as well. 🇬🇧

[@Joey.Alford]

lmfao i died at the conversation becki and dunna were having ahahhahha

[@qazzy9861]

Hey!!Can you guys make video about "Vintage Lense"

[@andrewalisov8738]

Check F-Stoppers how they do wide shot with long lens

[@sleichter]

"They're robots. That makes way more sense."

[@campervancrew]

as always great video 👍

[@ShinySereena]

Great video! Loved the info

[@PaulFeinberg]

Sweet video.....I miss camera camp.

[@nickjones5389]

OH MY GOSH cutting back to Becki and Dunna Did It had me laughing so hard!!

[@saschakreuzberger8230]

great Great work! 👌❤️

[@okaro6595]

Depth of field and the background blur are different concepts, related but different. One can have same depth of field but different background blur.

[@vaudanvisuals953]

U guys r such an inspiration to me : )

[@jpdj2715]

Perspective. If you ever took an in-depth class in perspective drawing (the nerdy side of art school) then you'll know that distance determines perspective and how anything farther away gets compressed in an exponential way. This happens in human vision and photographic lenses. It is just a geometric thing that has its most well-known "everyday" heuristic in the "inverse square law" for flash exposure. So, focal length does not determine perspective or compression, but distance does. How you perceive this in a photograph is influenced by the angle of view you chose with the focal length (better angle of view) that you applied. But that perception is also influenced by your exposure to 2D images and how these relate to the real world. Today, most people have seen so many images in their life that they cognitively can "handle" wide angle shots much easier.

[@okaro6595]

Cameras work differently on perspectives as the sensor plane is flat unlike the retina. You can see that when photographing buildings. If you tilt the camera up then the building seems to be tilted. This is natural as how could one know that it is not the building that has been tilted instead of the camera. This is not because the higher parts of the building are further away. Now this does not significantly affect the perspective discussed here.

[@jpdj2715]

@@okaro6595 - The "tilt" of a building follows from simple geometry, assuming a lens that doesn't distort in this respect. With the camera (film/sensor) as well as the lens, s nodal plane, parallel to the building you get a parallel projection on the film/sensor of parallel lines, when you tilt the camera up then this changes completely and then you depict the top of the building smaller as it is farther away than the base of the building. This has nothing to do with the curved retina or flat film/sensor.

[@dinagalall]

Always amazing videos!

[@planeboyuk]

Geeky and funny loved this, kinda felt like Chris spying from the bushes, which strangely is something I could imagine him doing (for fun) 😂👍

[@grfaudio]

I really enjoyed watching this...while at the same time feeling slightly sad for Gerald and Chris.....

[@TubeThings]

Hey! I have HD vision!!! ...but only sometimes!!! ...I’m blind most of the time!

[@ScottJWaldron]

Great video guys. 7:18 I've said the same thing in a video when I compared two lenses. One comment caught it after a week or two.

[@vivelafrance8400]

Nice vid. Not much of a surprise. The perspective is the same if the distance (sensor subject) and the distance (subject background) remains the same whatever the focal distance. People think the background is compressed because the longer the focal distance, the less "content" in the frame you get compared to a wider angle and then your brain thinks it's close to the subject because it has nothing else to compared the subject with. When foreground and more elements get in the shot (by zooming out), the background will appear less far away in comparison to the surrounding. For example, when a close tree is the size of a mountain, your brain understand the mountain is very far away (or the tree is very close). The brain tricks us.

[@jpdj2715]

Entry pupil. When the entry pupil gets very large, depiction of 3D objects in 2D gets visibly different. In the days of very insensitive film, if you wanted to make a portrait, with regular cameras, you had to expose so long that people only could sit still, when stands with clamps behind them, kept them still long enough. Even, they had to keep their eyes closed, sometimes, and the photographer would retouch (paint) the eyes over the print later on. So studio cameras and lenses existed that tried to defeat this problem by increasing the entry pupil. Imagine a 20cm diameter lens (8"). Now imagine a frontal shot of a head. The large diameter "sees" much more of the sides of the head and the ears and projects this as a flat (2D) image. So the head looks like a pancake, or the cartoon situation where the chicken got under the steamroller. When film became more sensitive this issue disappeared. Even in large format (think an 8"x10" negative) photography, lenses never got entry pupils that would present us with this issue - they generally were not "fast". And, for portraits, why would you? A "standard" angle of view you would get between 300mm and 400mm, so you need a rather small aperture for a headshot where both eyes are sharp, or even more difficult we have sharpness from tip of nose to include the ears. Aperture F/90 is totally meaningful if you shot this technology. And it explains the development of studio "pack" strobes putting 4,800 Watt.seconds into a single flash. (Watt.seconds are like the millimeter variant of the kilometer: 3.6 kilo.Watt.hours equals 3,600,000 Watt.seconds). Power (Watt, as a potential) is W.s/s. If the 4,800 W.s is delivered in 1/200 sec, then that pack strobe's theoretical power is 960,000 Watt. Or, we have an optimization problem in photography between keeping 2D depiction "acceptable" by not making the entry pupil too big, and in that we suffer less from optical distortions like chromatic aberration as well as heavy weight, keeping focal length short enough to not have to stop down too much for depth of field and keep sensor size large enough to retain positive qualities like sensitivity

[@aranu157]

you both are such nerds. I love it.

[@SimoneBrown]

08:44 is where it starts getting interesting

[@justmattgray]

I learned way too much in 15 minutes.

[@theamericanaromantic]

If a MFT sensor makes a 50mm lens into a ~100mm equivilent, will it also have the "lens compression" of an actual 100m lens? Please someone explain like I'm 5

[@okaro6595]

The "compression" is all about distance and framing. How it is achieved is not relevant so a 50 mm with MFT produces similar results as 100 mm on full frame. If you want also the same depth of field you must open the aperture two stops.

[@BrilliantBenGaming]

the real questions: who is Jared? 30 seconds to Mars Jared?

[@jaredyoder2455]

I'm Jared

[@BrilliantBenGaming]

@@jaredyoder2455 I'm Spartacus!

[@Dukeofpizza]

CIRCLE OF CONFUSION!!!!!!!!

[@marcusbonham]

3:50 That lens on that tripod 😂

[@benarnoux]

What smart and talented bois.

[@DavidPadron]

ufff todas las ópticas una locura... 👌💥👌

[@JordanBrothersRacing]

For me this video demonstrates how to maximize your time at a location and create multiple pieces of content. This video is the definition of killing two birds with one stone.

[@cordoz]

Love your videos

[@coreywirth319]

That was awesome

[@karatiz]

Was wondering when this was going to pop up lol

[@koketsomalekutu7936]

Such a fun video. Was sub'd to everyone already, but if I wasn't, I would have after this vid.

[@MapEffects]

It's like they're trying to speak to me!

[@gioazzarello1333]

I’m as confused here as I was in my stats class...😂

[@MikeMarrah]

What you're conclusion is at the end is always what I've considered compression to be. So isn't the conclusion that compression is real, but that DOF and compression just aren't the same?

[@AdamKuzniar]

No, the "compression" comes from the distance to your subject and not from the lens you use.

[@grimmfilm8867]

Adam Kuzniar yes but what Mike is saying is that people have known this about lens compression for a while. Being that it’s already implied that you would be at a different distance with different focal lengths to get a similar composition.

[@MikeMarrah]

@@grimmfilm8867 yes, exactly my point. They're kinda saying people are mistakingly calling DOF "compression" (which I don't really hear people say anymore?), when "compression" is the difference between the background content, not the background blur.

[@grimmfilm8867]

@@MikeMarrah I read you loud and clear. It seems more about terminology than the actual subject ( lens compression ). It might make more sense to me if composition wasn't involved but when is composition not involved? I just feel like this would confuse some beginners. It reminds me of the video they did on crop vs full frame. They made some vague claims/comparisons but funny enough, they had examples using lens compression.

[@jackfitzwilliam9763]

It doesnt really change the way you shoot, but it does change the way you think about lenses. Knowing that a telephoto lens is not what causes compression, and that its actually just an illusion is kind of cool. However, this does come into play for people (like what I used to do) who use a telephoto lens to take a panorama of a subject to get the "compression" of a longer lens but the width of a wide angle.. but this is false. It doesnt work that way and would look the same if you just used a wider lens. Both options look identical, but doing the panorama takes way more time. This also plays into when people, for example, want to upgrade from micro 4/3 to full frame. They will say they want to get the compression of an 85mm lens but the wide angle of a 42.5mm lens.. but thats not how it works. An 85mm lens on a FF camera looks identical to a 42.5mm lens on a micro 4/3. So I guess if you were like me and wanted full frame for that reason, then you'd change your mind after learning about the compression myth

[@avicreates]

Dude, which part of heaven is this, how do u get access to all this goodness!!?? 😁 😁 😁

[@jbthementor4905]

You guys continue to push the envelope. Can you guys do a video on premier pro.

[@ScriptyVijay]

Good one 🔥

[@Eden-vh3kb]

Who doesn't have a Pavlovian response to a low battery indicator? HAHA

[@qmfosejs]

clicked that at 47 second upload time stamp

[@qmfosejs]

Feels good