Understanding focal length can change how you see the world through your camera. For many, the concept might sound a bit technical, but it's more about creating images that feel natural, like they could have been seen with your own eyes.
Coming to you from James Popsys, this thoughtful video discusses why he considers 43mm to be the "true focal length." This might sound like a niche obsession, but Popsys explains it clearly: when using a 43mm lens, the magnification matches what we perceive with our own eyes. That doesn’t mean the field of view is identical to human vision—our eyes are complex, and trying to replicate their full field of view is tricky. However, 43mm, or anywhere from 40 to 50mm, gives a similar sense of scale, making objects look as big or small as they do in real life. For those who love to capture scenes just as they see them, this is a significant advantage.
Popsys’ interest in the 43mm focal length goes beyond just numbers; it influences the gear he chooses. He shares his experiences using various cameras, like his Hasselblad with a 55mm lens, which translates to 43mm on a full-frame sensor. More recently, he’s been experimenting with a Leica Q3 43, which also features a 43mm lens. For him, shooting at this focal length makes photos appear as natural as possible, as if you’re looking through the scene with your own eyes. This is an approach that can be especially appealing if you’re aiming for realism in your photography, without the exaggeration that wider or longer lenses can sometimes introduce.
Beyond the technical aspects, Popsys illustrates his point through on-location shooting. He’s seen scouting spots around Clangothlin, hoping for ideal light and positioning of sheep—an example of how even the best plans can depend on factors you can’t control. Yet, he finds joy in these situations, using focal length to make the most of the compositions he discovers. He explains that part of the appeal of the 43mm focal length is its ability to maintain a realistic perspective while still giving enough flexibility to frame shots that feel genuine and not overly stylized.
While this video focuses heavily on focal length, Popsys doesn’t just stay technical. He takes you along on a journey through different locations, adjusting his approach as the light changes and making quick decisions about where and how to shoot. For him, choosing focal lengths like 43mm is about simplicity and clarity—capturing scenes in a way that looks familiar, almost as if you’ve been there yourself. If you’re tired of images that feel overly processed or manipulated, experimenting with this range could be a refreshing change. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Popsys.
Call it a crutch, but I find slightly wider and slightly longer FLs more interesting, probably because the perspectives are not what we're used to seeing all the time. That said, I did enjoy using a 20mm pancake lens on a Micro Four Thirds camera for a few years, partly because it was a super-compact combo.
Image is everything. 😎
Yep Focal Length ah! Anyone who can remember a film maker holding his hands out front with thumbs together and fingers out fingers together upward where the area between was the place to be filmed, today there is a long lens thing with a cup for the eye and you see all the different views for big screen, remember our square box TV screens?
To say if you hold out hand and with thumb up it will fully cover the moon or sun (if you brave it). Then find a lens where what's image of a scene and on your monitor or even print has the moon sized proper to size of a out stretched hand and thumb over would cover and getting a image of proper side to side focal it can not be done, for no matter the camera and sensor size and a lens mm you will never get the right size of a moon along with the side to side fields the eye can see!
We humans have peripheral vision just like horses and deer, it may not be clear and sharp but we see things in our view that are there and are part of view.
Do this is best, While driving look at the license plate of the car in front of you and read it but concentrating on that area just kind of view the tail lights they will be out of focus and not sharp. Along with your eyes moving all about all the time you know what going on from side to side and up and down.
Next ever look a print large or small you scan over the entire image at little sections no matter the distance and reason the size of the photo determines the distance for it to be viewed.
A full frame camera just means it is the same size as the old film camera film captured and is the selected size, the other thing is no matter the sensor size lenses are made for the sensor area so a lens of any size mm will cover the sensor within the circle it project onto the sensor. So when buying a lens for a camera maker that circle projection is made for that sensor and all lenses are made with the circle and mm's conform.
So no matter the distance using a 10mm or even 600mm you get the same size circle on the same size sensor. The image result will be the same size no matter and when viewing a print no matter the size everyone will scan it piece by piece and never all at once, we do it fast so our minds get the image and puts it together, but still a huge print or painting people may stand awhile scanning just to see the whole and if close pixel peep with a closer look.
There is away to capture the moon at any mm on any sensor and get a in focus and sharp moon,
You have to bracket 5 at +/- 3EV say using .5 as the center image and both ISO/SS being equal as numbers 125 and using F8 to F11 for focus (you manual focus till it is in focus filling the sensor. the first image in focus at 125/125 f/11 and a foreground in focus and lit fully at night the way your eye sees and when all images combined you get what the eye sees somewhat but never how wide the eye sees with peripheral vision and what the eye sees as the moon the size of your out stretch thumb.
I did this with many mm selections on a full frame A7S one night long ago, with no joy getting all to marry.
1. the size of a moon on a full frame 600mm lens filing the sensor
2. the moon covering the full frame sensor at 1800mm
3. A cityscape at 12mm with a sharp and focused moon if you pixel peep.
4. ghosting of all image before combining, 5 at +/- 3EV a program finds it hard with the moon moving each frame only one HDR program from years past can do it, Photomatix Pro 6.
I used a 35 f/2 on my Nikon as a standard lens. I sold my 50 to buy it back in 1975. I later was intrigued by the Pentax ME with its Pancake 40mm f/2.8. It hooked me. I now use an APC cropped Z50 with the 26mm f/2.8 Pancake, giving me 39mm effective. (I started with the 28mm, which is a 42mm equivalent, but it protruded too far under my coat.) Even though I have a Z6ii and a Z8 with 8 other lenses, when I want to walk about and shoot street shots, or travel light, I wear my Z50 and 26mm under my jacket. It's like having my Pentax ME, but without film limitations. Great video and summary article!
So many people crunching numbers to find a "perfect match". I believe it's a waste of time.
When I look at a room, I'm seeing an almost 180-degree wide field. When I look hard at an object or person's face in that room, I'm seeing it intently as if zoomed in. I can isolate an area and look at that for an "in-between focal length".
Our eyes are not static, nor is our brain.
P.S. I have ADHD, but I don't know if that's a factor in this.
What is realistic? For me I see something then decide what lens works for me. A 24-105mm covers 43mm beautifully without wasting money on an overpriced fixed lens point and shoot with very limited flexibility.
Multiple lenses allow for far more flexibility of vision. I prefer to not artificially limit myself in my photo journey.
Though I usually use my 15-27 zoom for landscapes, a 43 mm being close to your eye, would make selecting a composition easier. If it looks good to your eye, it's probably good with the 43. The big problem is your eye sees peripheral images, and though blurry it changes the composition somewhat. So for me the 43 +- has never had the same image impact as the eye. So I sometimes go a little wider, but then the center looses it's importance by getting smaller. It's all a tough compromise. My only solution has been to take a few shots at different lengths and look at them on the viewfinder.