The only true focal length.

Head to www.squarespac... to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code JAMES.
This week I'm talking about 43mm, and how it's the only true focal length we have as photographers, and why that matters.
My New Book: www.jamespopsy...
Antartica workshop: geni.us/Antarc...
---
My Gear: www.jamespopsy...
---
MUSIC:
Take your films to the next level with music from Musicbed. Sign up for a free account to listen for yourself: fm.pxf.io/c/31...
MB01M7NGVFIH8FN
MB019XU56VDX59J

[@JamesPopsysPhoto]

Ahh yes, the diagonal not the diameter. Maths and I don’t get on. Thanks for the correction 🙏

[@johnanthonycolley3803]

😂

[@cameraprepper7938]

Diagonal and diameter is just about the same (image circle) ! But 43 mm focal length is not the only "true" focal length !

[@dr.rationalist9669]

Never mind. I think the whole story about this is marketing BS. Why should the sensor diagonal matching the focal length have anything to do with our eyes? The angle of view is roughly the same of our natural perception. But since we don‘t have a fixed focal length it can‘t exactly match, or did you ever wonder why our eyes are not popping out whenever we are looking to something very close? It‘s a good story made up by Leica, especially fore those who believe in the unique Leica look 😉

[@andreas_rr]

@@dr.rationalist9669 sorry, but what the F are you talking? First, basic trignonometry, (focal) length divided by width (sensor diagonal) translates (via cosine) to an angle (=FOV). "The angle of view is roughly the same of our natural perception" you litterally say it, thus contradicting yourself. "Since we don't have a fixed focal length". Idk what weed gives you the superpower to zoom in into your vision, but the normal eye cannot change the focal length. You're confusing focal length and focussing distance. "did you ever wonder why our eyes are not popping out whenever we are looking to something very close" That has nothing to do with focal length, but focussing. I would heavily suggest you to reconsider what those two things are and what they do. I dont know (and dont care about) this "Leica story" you're talking about, but how about you take some courses in basic biology and (optical) physics before talking such nonsense.

[@philmartin5689]

@dr.rationalist9669 it's not marketing, actually. The focal length corresponding to the sensor/film diagonal is the median focal length, or to put it another way, the cross-over point where lenses transition from wide angle to telephoto.

[@krishnakumarr9619]

You're the first person i thought of when i saw the Q3 43 announcement.

[@krishnakumarr9619]

Petition to make a phone camera system with 40mm as its 1x.

[@CianMcsweeney]

Yeah I hate how wide the "standard" camera on phones are

[@janezschrott8429]

I was just telling my wife the other day that all phones have one wide and one ultra wide lens and really the main lens should be 35mm. I find 40+ just a bit too narrow.

[@janezschrott8429]

But I agree, 40mil should be 1x magnification as standard. Then we could talk about real magnification. Like 400mil FF is 10x mag.

[@SD_UK]

My Pixel's 'standard' lens is way too wide! Perhaps more annoyingly the 'x2' realistic perspective on the 8 Pro is the only lens option - out of the four - that is not 100% optical. It's still very usable to be fair, but .. ;)

[@jackofblades6736]

Nah just get a camera.

[@ericlamont4130]

This is why I love photography. As passionate as James is about capturing things the way our eyes see them, I am passionate about capturing perspectives that are unusual to our eyes - ultra wide, extreme height, or in a wide format like xpan or 2.35:1. I love James’ work, don’t get me wrong, I just think it’s awesome this hobby can be done so many different ways, and none of them are wrong!

[@SD_UK]

Spot on. I saw a comment in a previous video of James' where one commenter issued a few sentences complaining about James' style being too literal and 'flat', instead of being dark, rich and moody. .. Honestly . . 🙄..theres a million KZbin channels with photographers pumping out dark, dramatic and moody. Ad nauseum. This channel is hugely refreshing And also! I'm not fond of parsnips, but I don't make a point of hanging around in the greengrocers moaning about the notion. ;) It's all subjective.

[@kaipbowe]

I think photography KZbin can be funny, educational or just good looking/relaxing videos. Not many do all three! Top stuff

[@MrFL08]

Just came back from Venice after shooting with this camera, astonishing. Great video as always

[@_Emit_]

James.. the video quality was so good in this video, genuinely might be my favorite video of yours

[@ChrisBranch]

I _knew_ it! 😂 As soon as I saw the 43 announced, I thought you would be on it. I'm shooting with a Fuji X-T4 and the 27mm, and getting used to that focal range. The Leica is the dream 👌😊

[@spheremotel1772]

Those photos of the churchyard are stunning!👍

[@markhampshirephotography]

You've just inspired me to go out and do photography tomorrow, thanks James 👍🏻

[@eike.zender]

I see what you did here 😂

[@nxmrjake]

Ooh another new camera!?! You’ve been blessed this year! If you’re bored of the hassy I don’t mind taking if off your hands for a bit. Nbd

[@loozerid]

I find I like the opposite I do photography to see things my eyes can’t see.

[@TungstenOvergaard]

100% agree.

[@mmk2410]

Honestly, I didn't think of the magnification before, rather of the field of view the human eye sees when focusing on something. Very interesting point and absolutely right. Great pictures as always. Thank you! :)

[@sorwerk]

James, the research and the pin was worth it, even if only for the opening scene which was absolutely great, I had the feeling I'm looking at a painting

[@elwick_photo]

James: sorry Sony, I now see why having a boring but reliable camera is brilliant, I won't need to do that again for a long time. Also James: so I got given a Hassy and then bought this Leica... Yeah yeah I know. Ah I do love your stuff, it's always good and amusing. But we all fall for GAS even if we don't want to 😂😂

[@JeevesTCW]

Some fab pics, looking forward to seeing more in future from this lovely camera

[@flowkes2707]

Its agreat day today - a new james popsys video came out

[@adamcook5940]

There's not a lot nicer than to walk about with a camera! Great stuff, thanks x

[@Tedwill-home]

I have the Q3 43. I sold my Q3 28 because it was only a sidekick to my SL3 on landscape trips. But I’m using the Q3 43 every day now. More often than my M11P. Having an APO lens this handy is amazing.

[@anonmcanon5724]

This is why I love the Lumix 20mm f1.7. It's really close to what my eyes see so knowing where to stand for a photo is fairly easy, it's small, sharp and fast, and it only costs like 200€. It has a couple of small issues like focus breathing and relatively slow focussing which makes it good for some styles and bad for others but it's great for the price. You can get an amazing EDC setup with it and a small M43 camera for very little money

[@philmartin5689]

I've recently purchased a Lumix GX80 and a 20mm lens as a run around camera, I wasn't disappointed. Also having been a long time Mamiya RB67 user, I prefer the 4/3 ration to the usual 3/2.

[@henriquea1500]

You should look into the Pentax 43mm Limited then, it was the original one designed for the most natural FOV. There's also a rare "Special" version in Leica screw mount.

[@peterfritzphoto]

How many of us thought of James when the Q3 43 was launched?

[@philmartin5689]

The diagonal of the FF sensor is 43mm, not the diameter, but I concur with the 43mm focal length. I bought a Pentax K1ii just so I could use my old 43mm Ltd on it. With APS-C, I often use a 28mm, and I've more or less fixed a 20mm lens to my Lumix gx80. So yes, I also really love that ocal range, 50mm on FF, however, I can't cope with at all.

[@athmaid]

Oh man, I've been on that chase for a while now. Been pouring over text books and papers on neurobiology (my uni specialises in human vision funnily enough), calculating with my very mediocre math skills, etc. There are so many factors you can incorporate. Like the way our eyes and brain do "white balance". Or which rectangular aspect ratio fits our weirdly shaped FoV the best for which situations. I've come to the conclusion that for myself, it's more about capturing how I think the scene felt rather than how it "objectively" looked through my eyes. For me landscapes tend to feel like 23mm in a 2:1 aspect ratio. Most other subjects feel like 43mm 3:2, either portrait or landscape orientation. White balance is still tricky. As is colour perception in general with effects like the Purkinje or Bezold-Brücke shifts

[@Username_CC_]

This has always fascinated me because I have always felt like 24-28mm is more what I see when walking around. Maybe that means everyone has their own sense of what they are looking for in a photo.

[@ruffmadman]

This validated my purchases of the new Viltrox 28mm for my APS-C camera. I cant wait for it to arrive!!

[@Geezon]

"There's a photo here, somewhere." is what runs through my head more often than I'd like, I wish I could find a good composition quicker.

[@kavan3]

Really enjoyed that shot at 2:59

[@nickyfoulkes8476]

I have driven a canal barge across that aqueduct. Fightening, but a grand view down the river Dee.

[@alessandrosfligiotti1694]

Was waiting for this video since your last one 😂

[@Smeeble09]

If you didn't have chance you can go round and walk up on top of the aqueduct. I got some nice shots from up there, or walking down into the tunnel that the canal runs through. Also, nice ice cream canal boat normally docked there.

[@peteb5461]

I use a Rokkor 45mm F2 alot and being a vintage lens it gives some nice character too... Keep it up sir, amazing as always!

[@hankroest6836]

5:58 Now THAT'S a hard workin' image!

[@sigsegv111]

Hi James, cool video, cool content, I have on my 24-70 already 43mm glued in but one thing needs to be clarified .. if you are shooting with 55mm with 0.79 crop or 28mm with 1.5 crop it's still 55/28mm in regard to magnification ... crop factor only crops the image area but the focal length physics remains same .. ;)

[@neeravnaik]

As a corollary while I like the 50mm and 35mm lately I am liking 24mm and 85mm very interesting focal lengths. They are giving me a view that we do not normally see and helps create interest

[@MacnTeensVisuals]

Indeed I agree, similar to what we see just looks so nice👌

[@TheGJMVideos]

I think it is fair to say that your two most recent KZbin videos have caused me to reconsider how I set my camera up for future adventures. I would love to buy a Leica Q3 43 but my bank manager has given me over 5000 reasons why this will have to wait a while. But my Fuji 27mm has a converted focal length of 40mm and I may weld this to my XE-4 where it already lives most of the time. This will have to do for a while as I put some more of your ideas into action. Thanks for the great videos James

[@MWRtelevision]

I love 40mm too, but I’ve really been digging 24 lately which I really love the depth of it

[@johnpollock6996]

Good stuff James. There is a feature of life that changes field of view from natural to narrow instantaneously, glasses. I have been wearing them for 15-20 years and still think I am seeing the world through straws. It's a 1000 mm view with zero magnification.

[@KyleByquist]

can't wait to hear your thoughts on the 43mm Q3; I would love to have a dead simple travel camera with that focal length

[@tjsinva]

Early on, the only lens I owned was a 50mm. It worked very well for a long time. Good point. Carry on. 👍🥂

[@BrianJonesPhotography]

I have got a 43mm limited lens on my pentax k1camera. It’s taken me a while to get use to and appreciate, but love it and produces great colours due the lens coatings

[@NikonDave]

The one thing I think we all want to know is how you managed to get your hands on that camera so quickly? Massive backorder everywhere I've looked.

[@CianMcsweeney]

He has a partnership with MPB, I'm guessing they had access to one and shared it with James. Either that or Leica reached out to him

[@NikonDave]

@@CianMcsweeney Jealous either way though he did say he'd bought it.?

[@DavidMBanes]

Great video. I'm still re-learning photography since taking up digital with a Fujifilm. An old X-M1 with the TTArtisans 27mm and I love it. Tried the 35mm (eq 50mm) and not so much. I did dabble with the Lumix S9 and Sigma 45mm, that was awesome but sold it as need one camera with a viewfinder and the X-M1 one was more fun than the S9! I ended up with a Fujifilm X-S20 as the S9 replacement, but the 27mm still goes on it more often than the 35mm.

[@TheNewArtSchool]

Great video. We can also adapt a Minolta rokkor 45mm f2 to any mirrorless for around £100z

[@PLVG-plg]

I appreciate and enjoy your videos, thank you! Please comment on how you reconcile wanting the focal length to match what we see but not the colors. More specifically, your penchant is for taking color out of the sky because you believe that helps avoid distracting from the main subjects of your photos, yet often the result is not what one would see.

[@piero_75]

I like what David Hockney says, to paraphrase, "The problem with photography is that it's a guy squinting through a hole with one eye." I think that is why I like using different focal lengths, to disrupt that everyday point of view. But I do agree that there is something pleasing about 40 - 50 mm.

[@philmartin5689]

Having read quite a bit of Hockney on photography, I'd take what he says with a pinch of salt. IMHO I don't think he has a clue when it comes to the subject.

[@johnhagen31]

I'm not sure I agree with the need for this subject. In the same way that some pedantic folks claim that "grey is not a colour", I question the need to discuss it. We photographers use what we're presented with - the light, the setting, the subject, etc. We then manipulate / interpret those things to produce a deliverable which matches our intention(s). We do that by deliberately incorporating colour, composition, focal length, perspective, etc. to suit our end. So what if one particular focal length matches that of the eye? It's just one aspect of how we create an image. Every photo is a 2D interpretation of a 3D subject, and therefore not natural. So don't worry about focal length, just use it as you see fit.

[@CzarekKukowka]

I just received my 27mm lens (41mm eqv on full frame) and I love it!

[@Gynra]

Pentax have been making a rather nice little 43 mm lens for years. I have it, but I don't use it enough. After seeing this video, I will make an effort to use it on my full-frame Pentax K-1.

[@philmartin5689]

I've had my 43mm for decades, bought for use on an MZ5n and I bought a K1ii just to be able to use it without cropping.

[@davidmill7289]

43mm - a perfect use for my vintage 28mm film lenses on APSC (42mm equiv)!

[@andreas_rr]

Personally, i feel like shorter focal lengths feel more natural to me. It's just a matter of perspective (so, proportions of things at different distances) vs FOV (the human eyes see around 180-200° so a camera is never going to capture the whole image a person can see at a single moment. In the end, however, the human eye is vastly too complex that it can really be imitated with a camera. We've got a few orders of magnitude more dynamic range, a lot more photoreceptors than a camera has pixels, those have a pretty different colour profile, and the eye has varying density of the receptors, being highest at the middle of course, while the peripheral vision is extremely inaccurate. Plus, the brain does A SHITTON of image processing, even filling up a tiny blind spot we got on the retina. So cameras and eyes will never capture anything alike, unless we spend millions "just" to develop a biometrically accurate camera. (Note about that, that i do think the next steps in camera technology will very much be inspired by the human/animal eye to essentially create results we cannot reproduce with a "conventional" camera) Personally, i really love 800mm (or just any very long focal length, lets say starting around 200, but peaking at 500+). It's unique, has a very different and new perspective, doesn't try to hide that fact, and overall it allows you to see things/details you would never see with your own eyes without any help. But then again, my style of photography is much more focussed on capturing small details than a big picture ((pseudo-)macro, portrait, long-distance photography), so i guess the focal length is just made for me. (as a note, i LOVE 800mm portraits, even though they need a lot of free space to pull off, since the subject needs to be ~60m away for a full body shot or still 20-30m for a upper body shot).

[@Retset]

I have a Z6 with the 24-200. I think James, you are persuading me to back to MPB and buy the 40mm prime. It will make a much lighter and more wieldy combo for 'walkabout' type stuff.

[@billwinward9324]

I was on the verge of ordering a 27mm for my APS-C camera and then I realised that even with the right focal length, I couldn’t replicate James’ way of looking at the world which is what matters.

[@thebitterfig9903]

I really love the TTArtisan 27/2.8. So cheap, and such interesting character. The heavy vignette and cats eye bokeh might not be to everyone’s taste, but it’s got a vintage charm that’s not common on autofocus lenses.

[@borderlands6606]

I enjoy visually neutral focal lengths that allow the subject to speak for itself, and don't impose drama where none is present in the shot.

[@motorvelo]

It’s the diagonal that you measure across the sensor. Also the 43, 55 or 50mm lenses replicate the perspective of the human eye, neither compressing it or expanding it. I always taught that the standard focal length for a given format replicates the view of the human eye without peripheral vision.

[@carlallen333]

Love your videos. I guess I've always thought that 60mm was closest to eyeball magnification.

[@kenzo0133]

Hi James, as always i'm just fascinate in how you get your composition and the magic you put in post production. Can you share a bit of your mystery in editing technic? Thanks

[@nxmrjake]

I’d like some new editing videos. Tip: If you buy his preset packs you’ll quite easily get images to look the colour of his. The composition … that’s down to you 😅

[@GlenBarnett]

Great vid as always James. Can you tell me the name of the track when you're at the viaduct/aquaduct please. I have an account on Musicbed and I absolutely love that sound Keep up the great work 👍

[@nicksanto2315]

Beautiful pronunciation of Glangclothlen

[@mipmipmipmipmip-v5x]

Pentax might have been one of the first to do 43mm with their Limited lens

[@OttoFilmStudios]

So for APS-C would the only “true” focal length be 26 mm? Great video!

[@sdrtcacgnrjrc]

And I guess around 20 on M43

[@ChristianB90]

More like 28,5 for APS-C and 21,6 for M43.

[@CianMcsweeney]

More like 27mm, Fuji's XF 27mm 2.8 and the viltrox 27mm 1.2 are the main apsc options

[@BigAndFatGamer]

28mm * 1.525 = 42.7mm That's as close as you can get to 43mm

[@philmartin5689]

No, it's the 28mm on APSc, 1.5 x 28 = 42.

[@shanksisnoteventhatstrongbruh]

i would love if a company came out with a phone that has a dual camera setup with two 48mp 1" sensors, one with a 20mm Wide lens (with 24mm, 28mm & 35mm quick digital crops) & a 40mm "Standard" lens (with 50mm, 70mm & 85mm quick digital crops).

[@officervaca00123]

the photo at 5:43 mark, thats what id print out and be like "yeah."

[@patriand]

I think you are right an also a little wrong. 43mm feels natural for us photographers because we are used to viewfinders, and our reletionship with the art of photography is primed looking through a viewfinder. A normal 1x viewfinder when you hold it to your eyes is only covering around 50degrees(diagonally) of your field of vision. Therefore if we open both our eyes the viewfinder eye will see the world identically with the uncovered eye if we use a 43mm lens. However this is not anything non photographers have any relationship with. There the 50mm was back in the day perhaps more natural. As if you hold a classical print on arms lenght. It covers 40 degrees of your vision. Closer to a 50mm lens. And 28mm is today very popular as that is what a normal pc monitor covers when you sit close to it. So: human eye distorsion and natural focal lengt is different from your preffered viewing experience and habit of consuming photographs. If your gallery print 1m width is meant to be viewed from 1m then it will cover 90 degrees. Most natural then would be whatever that fov is. 20mm ish? And for vr helmets. Most natural fov is 360degrees, then cropped by the helmets 80ish degrees fov.

[@hermitmonk52]

Actually, I'd quite like to hear the 9 minute version. I was just wondering if you were going to mention APSC etc when you threw in the "equivalent" remark. How would you feel using a 28 or 30 on an APSC? I wonder if there'd be a nagging feeling that it wasn't quite the real thing.

[@picturemaker]

Where was that mountains through the windows shot taken James?

[@harryblack]

Aha I also bought the Q3 43 immediately on announcement and was thinking it’s James’ perfect camera the entire time. Especially after the recent Q3 video

[@christof4105]

My favorite focal lengh is 24mm on canon apsc which is 38,4mm in FF. It´s wide enough to include enough scenery but not too wide to distort the image. 50mm FF i think is too cramped.

[@Bluepandaiscool]

🔥

[@matthewtan1602]

I just bought a 40mm minolta rokkor just because of this. Also because its a tiny M mount lens.

[@deanisplemoni]

I think the term should be along the lines of the same "compression" as the human eye. Where distant objects seem as close together as the human eye sees. Field of view is a bit harder to guage, because we have two eyes, that stitch together one much wider "image".

[@SMGJohn]

40mm is arguably, the most sexy focal length. Its just wide enough, and just close enough.

[@nicolasguillenc]

Those church photos are insaneee

[@MeAMuse]

Cemeteries are definitely calming places.... that's why people are dying to get in....

[@ronboe6325]

I'm a bit bemused by discussions on focal lengths (save for astro photography....for reasons) unless, for a given use case one range of focal length would be preferred over others (e.g. portraits, macro's, wildlife etc.). Your use case seems to push you towards 43-55mm ish range which I normally don't use. But considering the good work you do I'm thinking I should pay attention more. way back in my film days 28mm was my favorite (probably because I couldn't afford a good telephoto......) and today, rarely use THAT focal length. Weird.

[@craigcarlson4022]

Seconding (or actually, 46ing as of the time of this comment) another commenter’s suggestion to start a movement to get the iPhone makers to provide a lens in 43mm equivalence.

[@rickymcc8624]

Sorry, out walking, hard to stay with this. I'm happy if you like or love 43mm. To me it's a bit 'ordinary' and for me more dramatic images usually come with something very different circa 16-24mm range or 70+. Prob why I like travelling with a 70-200 f 2.8 and 2-3 primes. Anyway got to go- sorry didn't make it to end.

[@julesc5571]

I have a Q and the images are extraordinary, different from my other cameras. These images are lovely, but don’t look remarkably different from your other work. Is it the apo focal length, or the edit?

[@mikemitchell3889]

Given the layout of human heads and eyes, you know, side-x-side, lateral arrangement, 'n all....Why shoot or compose/print vertically?

[@callumjohnson9433]

I love a 50mm but I have always been curious of a slightly wider lens. Would love to see you using the irix 45mm 1.4 and hear your thoughts on it.

[@Pablomache]

Interested to know your thoughts on adding the Leica Q43 Vs a kit that also includes two Hasselblad's + 55mm lens, and a Sony A7R V + 40mm G lens? Are you not quadrupling-up on gear that can produce similar results / with near identical focal lengths (40-43mm), and how do you even choose which camera to take with you LOL

[@jklphoto]

Not said, but I assume implied: it is the only TRUE focal length, because it tells the truth - optically. No telephoto compression. No wide angle "distortion". Getting a dynamic image from such an un-energetic lens requires skill and great composition. One lens. One camera in 2025 James?

[@DanielKramecki]

Yesterday with my 50mm lens I was shooting a landscape scene which included a full moon. Nevertheless the moon was significantly smaller when looking at it through camera as with my naked eyes. So, is it an illusion my own eyes make me? Or do our eyes see in different "focal lengths" depending on a situation?

[@lorec.1568]

I know that our eyes are capable of seeing in different focal lenghts. For example you can have a peripherical Vision and then focus on a little detail ignoring the rest.

[@stephenmason5682]

Its far better and easier to understand focal length if you refer to the length of the frame or sensors diagonal. Each film or sensor size, such 35mm, two and a quarter or 5 × 4 each have their own diagonal length. That is the base length or standard.

[@paolofusco7940]

Why don't you use a shift lens? It feels like it would suit your kind of photography well, and also straiten up some of those lines (please pardon my OCD)

[@reinhardankenbauer3241]

Clearly explained! - Would that mean, I'd get the same result with my APS sensor (Fujifilm xe4) by using a 28 mil (crop factor 1.5 = 42 mm)? ♥️🤪

[@ShutterKnack]

Are we just gonna ignore the Pentax FA limited 43mm 1.9 has been around for the longest time?

[@timothykieper]

Somewhat based on your opinions, I bought a manual focus 21mm lens for shooting on MFT. Like it quite a bit, but not sure I would like to shoot all day and every day with it? Also, seems that on MFT not quite as many ways to achieve the end result of (about) 40mm ? However, I am considering a few other options available at 17mm and 19mm and 23mm.

[@carbonium1264]

James have you tried Samyang 45mm f/1.8 its small and light and relatively afforteble

[@GaryJahman]

I agree

[@lylestavast7652]

so mark 43 on your zoom and use some vinyl tape to keep it from sliding...

[@kucken64]

Release the Anglesea cut

[@krishnakumarr9619]

1:39 I'd rather just trust the Pythagoras theorem.

[@stayuntilforever]

Maybe one day I can afford the Q3 but until then I keep on travelling with my XT2 and 35mm1.4

[@RamonLinares]

Since we have two eyes (most of the people anyway) shouldn’t it be 43mm anamorphic?

[@Coastographyy]

Then there's me who just bought a 70-200 lol

[@DouglasKnisely]

You aren't going to convince many of us to like 40-50mm equivalent. Not gonna happen. ;) Nothing exists between 28mm and 135mm for some of us.

[@sdrtcacgnrjrc]

1:45 Does a sensor have a diameter? (Makes me wonder why they aren't round like the aperture)

[@nirvanakruger]

Haha youre in my town 🤟