What focal lens is closest to human eyes (both eyes)


wazzupku

New Member
Apr 24, 2010
218
0
0
#1
Hi

Just a quick question. I know 35mm on Pentax crop body has the closest to human eye in term of field of vision. I want to know what focal length has the closest to human eye in term of field of vision, when both eyes open.


I only have 18-55 kit and at 18, it is still not any close to my eyes' field of vision. So I am guessing it should be around 10 to 12?
 

fengwei

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 25, 2004
14,462
12
0
Queenstown
www.pbase.com
#3
Quoted from wikipedia: "The approximate field of view of a human eye is 95° out, 75° down, 60° in, 60° up...", so with both eyes open, humna eyes' field of view would be 95° to the left and 95° to the right, 75° up and 60° down. Even a Pentax 10-17 fisheye lens (w/ FOV of 180° in all direction) can't give you such an angle of view from left to right, but it covers wider view from up to down.
 

wazzupku

New Member
Apr 24, 2010
218
0
0
#4
I don't think we can sum 95 + 95 cos in the middle, both eyes share the same field of view. So by guessing, the angle for both eyes should be 95 + a smaller number than 95 (guessing is around 45, which is half of 95). So total angle for both eye is around 150 degree? I am not sure, anyone can calrify?
 

CorneliusK

Senior Member
Jan 23, 2010
790
0
16
#5
The DA 15 actually comes quite close for me. Then again there are individual differences in each persons field of view, some people naturally have wider FOV due to the shape of their head/position of their eyes etc. For example, I believe my FOV is narrower that a typical person's as I have been wearing spectacles my whole life up till my recent vision correction surgery. My brain has been so used to processing images through the narrower FOV of a spectacles wearer that it can't really get used to the wider FOV without.
 

edutilos-

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2010
6,032
17
38
The Universe
www.facebook.com
#7
It depends if you concentrate.

If you just use peripheral vision then it's hard to say. I'm not even sure if all humans share the same FoV since people have eyes further apart, nearer together, etc.
 

Anthony Lee

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2009
2,465
2
38
Shunfu Road, Singapore
#8
I once read that the closest FOV to the human's is 43mm. So it's like 28mm on a cropped sensor.
Definitely 43mm. I used to have the famous three 28mms on my Canon 40D. That's why, my K5 came with the FA 31 ltd, which is the best in Pentax range nearest to 28mm. The FA 31 is fixed on my K5 and I am convinced thus far that it's as good as the famous three 28mms.
 

wazzupku

New Member
Apr 24, 2010
218
0
0
#9
Definitely 43mm. I used to have the famous three 28mms on my Canon 40D. That's why, my K5 came with the FA 31 ltd, which is the best in Pentax range nearest to 28mm. The FA 31 is fixed on my K5 and I am convinced thus far that it's as good as the famous three 28mms.
The DA 15 actually comes quite close for me. Then again there are individual differences in each persons field of view, some people naturally have wider FOV due to the shape of their head/position of their eyes etc. For example, I believe my FOV is narrower that a typical person's as I have been wearing spectacles my whole life up till my recent vision correction surgery. My brain has been so used to processing images through the narrower FOV of a spectacles wearer that it can't really get used to the wider FOV without.
On my 18-55, at 18mm, it is still too narrow for my FOV ><".

I did a little test by draw up a point on the wall then look straight into it. So both my eyes make a parallel line to the wall. Then keeping my eyes unmove, I extend my left arm to the left until my left eye can't see it. Also I do the same for right arm and right eye. Then I move both in a bit so I can barely see both arm. The angle makes my both of my arm is the FOV angle for my eyes. And it is about 175 degree. Is there any such lens provide this angle?
 

edutilos-

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2010
6,032
17
38
The Universe
www.facebook.com
#11
On my 18-55, at 18mm, it is still too narrow for my FOV ><".

I did a little test by draw up a point on the wall then look straight into it. So both my eyes make a parallel line to the wall. Then keeping my eyes unmove, I extend my left arm to the left until my left eye can't see it. Also I do the same for right arm and right eye. Then I move both in a bit so I can barely see both arm. The angle makes my both of my arm is the FOV angle for my eyes. And it is about 175 degree. Is there any such lens provide this angle?
While this is an interesting discussion, I can't help but wonder if it's worth so much deliberation on.

In the first place, all this seems very ludicrous to me, I must confess, because:

1. We don't see the world in static moments.
2. We don't see the world through a 3x2, 4x3, 7x6, 1x1 frame (along with every other format, including 6x5)

So my question is actually: what are you asking this for?
 

wazzupku

New Member
Apr 24, 2010
218
0
0
#12
While this is an interesting discussion, I can't help but wonder if it's worth so much deliberation on.

In the first place, all this seems very ludicrous to me, I must confess, because:

1. We don't see the world in static moments.
2. We don't see the world through a 3x2, 4x3, 7x6, 1x1 frame (along with every other format, including 6x5)

So my question is actually: what are you asking this for?
To find a best lens that has the same FOV of my eyes :) So personally, I can capture what I actually see and don't feel weird thinking "hey, where was that chair I saw before I pull up the camera?" :)
 

wazzupku

New Member
Apr 24, 2010
218
0
0
#13
While this is an interesting discussion, I can't help but wonder if it's worth so much deliberation on.

In the first place, all this seems very ludicrous to me, I must confess, because:

1. We don't see the world in static moments.
2. We don't see the world through a 3x2, 4x3, 7x6, 1x1 frame (along with every other format, including 6x5)

So my question is actually: what are you asking this for?
To find a best lens that has the same FOV of my eyes :) So personally, I can capture what I actually see and don't feel weird thinking "hey, where was that chair I saw before I pull up the camera?" :)
 

edutilos-

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2010
6,032
17
38
The Universe
www.facebook.com
#14
To find a best lens that has the same FOV of my eyes :) So personally, I can capture what I actually see and don't feel weird thinking "hey, where was that chair I saw before I pull up the camera?" :)
Ok, understand, but like I said, it's really very hard to determine, and probably is not 3x2, maybe something longer like 16x9 or even 2x1 if you are talking about peripheral vision as mentioned earlier. Probably something like a 35mm pano stitch, I guess? :dunno:
 

CorneliusK

Senior Member
Jan 23, 2010
790
0
16
#15
The point edutilos makes about the fov being dependent on whether you concentrate is a good one. How we perceive a scene is not simply what our eyes see but how our brain chooses in interprete it, and this will vary from scene to scene, regardless of what is the maximum width one can actually see.

Don't get so hung up on actual focal lengths, just get a ultra wide zoom so that you can have the flexibility to choose the most appropriate fov for the scene in your mind.
 

CorneliusK

Senior Member
Jan 23, 2010
790
0
16
#16
Haha whats with the forums? Frikkin double posting.
 

Last edited:

poseur

Senior Member
Jul 27, 2009
1,030
14
38
#17
I don't think we can sum 95 + 95 cos in the middle, both eyes share the same field of view. So by guessing, the angle for both eyes should be 95 + a smaller number than 95 (guessing is around 45, which is half of 95). So total angle for both eye is around 150 degree? I am not sure, anyone can calrify?
On a side note...Bruce lee is suppose to be able to "see" 180deg...thats why he became a legend kung fu artist as i read somewhere,he once says see punches from the sides....
 

Last edited:

xxrenxx

New Member
Aug 4, 2010
1,008
0
0
28
Eunos
#18
On a side note...Bruce lee is suppose to be able to "see" 180deg...thats why he became a legend kung fu artist as i read somewhere,he once says see punches from the sides....
Actually he can't see "180deg". The fact that he can see attack from the side is that his speed is too fast.
 

May 7, 2010
1,028
0
0
#19
Erm, I'm currently a medical student, and I've just had my Opthalmology module last semester.
Usual "field of vision" of any given human subject can range from 160-180 degrees. That is the norm, there's even some who has wider ones.
But, our mind cannot place all the focus on everything that appears right in front of us.

So, I personally agree with the old skool rule of saying 50mm(on 35mm equiv.) represents the "normal" human eyes. As thats the amount of things our mind can focus on.
And out of that range, the mind will choose to ignore.
Its the same theory as having a meal in the hawker center. Tonnes of noise but you only focus on the sound you want to hear.

In fact, there's such a condition where the brain loses the function of selecting the focus of sensation and perception of 1/more of our 5 senses. That we call it pathology, be it organic or psychological.

Hope that answers your question.
 

scurrvy

New Member
Apr 27, 2009
109
0
0
#20
I thought 40mm on full frame was considered the 'blind eye field of view'. I used to have a voigtlander R3, it's unique feature is that the viewfinder doesn't have any magnification. You can barely view the 40mm frame lines when you look through the finder. With glasses on, I couldn't see the frame lines. That is with just one eye though. With both eyes open, it would be wider.
 

Top Bottom