Why less than 24mm?

After realizing I wanted a wide angle lens, I started researching prime glass since they seemed to offer great values. My general knowledge (and quick reading) told me anything 35mm and less is considered, to some degree, as wide.

The labeled Wide Angle AF Nikkor 35mm f/2.0D Autofocus Lens was looking like a possible choice until I started reading the reviews, indicating that it wasn't that wide on a digital camera. Huh? Why?

Now this applies to most Digital SLRs, not just Nikon. The SLR cameras we know have a sensor that "reads" the image seen through the lens. The old film cameras of multiple decades have a sensor to record the exposure on the film, and the new digital cameras have a sensor to capture the image onto a storage card (i.e. SD, Compact Flash). The thing is that these sensors are actually different sizes (in most cases). The old 35mm or full-frame (full-format) cameras have a bigger sensor than most of the new Digital SLRs. Yes, there are a few DSLRs that have that same size sensor, but they are usually top-of-the-line and expensive.

In Nikon world, you'll see the old "traditional" sensor size referred to as FX, while the newer smaller sensor size is identified as DX. Now, lenses that were generally used with full-frame traditional sensor cameras are generally compatible with DX cameras, but there is a trade-off. Due to the difference in the size of the sensor, the smaller version sees less through the glass than the traditional size. There is a "crop-factor" depending on the size of the sensor, for Nikon DX it is about 1.5x and for Canon DSLRs, it is 1.6x.

So what does that mean with the 35mm prime lens I thought would be a good deal? It means that on my Nikon D50, that 35mm lens is really acting like a 52.5mm lens, not really wide at all. To be even close to the general definition of "wide" on a digital camera, I need to have my focal length less than 24mm since 24mm * 1.5 = 36mm.

Here's a quick table that helps show what is actually wide:

Wide: 24-35mm (FX or 35mm camera) vs. 16-24mm (DX camera)
Super-wide: 16-23mm (FX or 35mm camera) vs. 11-15mm (DX camera) ... "super-wide" is also known as "ultra wide".

In a nutshell, for your DSLR, look at the range of 10-24mm whether that be in zooms or primes for your wide glass. Below 10mm, today, it is more likely you're working with a fish-eye lens, which (while wide) is different than wide-angle lenses. My Tokina 11-16mm is the perfect mini-zoom for me to take a deep dive into the wide-angle world. What lens do you have? Or what glass are you looking to add to your collection?

Curiosity less than 24mm

I was jealous. My bro-in-law received a brand new lens for his Canon DSLR as a birthday gift. It was a telephoto lens, giving him the awesome ability to hone in on his subject from far away, I think it had a 200mm range. He could "peacefully" compose from his camera and shoot. He was already producing some spectacular shots at the local farmers market.

Immediately I thought of my one and only lens, the Nikkor 24-85mm AF-S, a great first lens to complement my first DSLR, the very spectacular and underrated D50. The 24-85 range is a sweet-spot, offering a flexibility to zoom in on a subject at a mid-distance as well as opening up wide enough to not feel constraints in smaller spaces. With this lens, I can compose portraits and I can shoot landscapes. I never really had a problem with this lens, it is sufficiently sharp, focuses well, maybe it's a little slow in lower light.

The 24-85mm was just that though, nothing out of the ordinary, just a really great "normal" lens. I didn't want to replace my perfectly good glass, but I was jealous of my brother-in-law's lens because he could now step out of that "normal" focal range with his extended zoom ability. The focal lengths greater than 85mm allowed him to make totally different exposures, to compose from his camera at lengths.

I had curiosities about the range on the other end of my first lens, focal lengths less than 24mm. With some trade-offs, these shorter focal lengths can offer such expansive perspectives, making the photographer concentrate on composition and position. These wide angles really allow the photographer to tell a more complete story in a single shot.

I like photography because it combines science and art, and under 24mm, some of the science makes unique contributions to the art it creates. This is what draws me specifically to these wide angles. The larger viewing angles gives way to exaggerating perspectives, seeing a lot in your frame, effectively distorting and adding dynamics to the picture. Under 24mm, the photographer needs to stay on his/her feet. There is less reliance on the zoom-range from the camera; instead, the photographer needs to push close to the subject, and consciously choose what to include and exclude from the frame, being very careful with placement and the effects of the lens's distortion. At less than 24mm, for a great shot, the photographer needs to tell a story.

Jealousy for my brother-in-law's telephoto lens was the ultimate catalyst that made me also want to go beyond the limits of my rig, wider than the 24mm end of my then only lens. Eventually I landed with a great piece of glass, the Tokina 11-16mm AT-X Pro DX f/2.8. See pictures from the Tokina 11-16mm Flickr group.


Nikon D50, Tokina 11-16mm @ 11mm, f/4, 1/60s