As an aside, a “slow motion camera” and a “high speed camera” are understood to be the same object, being a camera that can capture at high frame rates, to slow down apparent motion in the video output.
Why do cameras call it "Macro Lens" if it zooms in and is used to capture tiny objects? Shouldn't it be "Micro Lens"?
Submitted 3 weeks ago by simple@lemm.ee to nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
Comments
litchralee@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
jol@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
Which is fine, because the opposite is a time lapse camera.
randombullet@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
Two train of thoughts. Making something 1:1 ratio is a true “macro” lens for photography. Because you’re increasing the size of the object to match the size of the sensor.
Then you got microscopes which makes things much larger than life.
For which manufactures call it what? Probably all marketing, but this makes the most sense in my life for justification.
ma11en@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
To add further confusion, I’m not sure if it’s still the case, Nikon used to brand their macro lenses as Micro Nikkor.
Doxin@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
A macro lens produces a large image. It’s a bit silly but I guess once these things get a name it’s hard to get it changed.
ma11en@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Macro and Micro are both used in photography.
Macro generally is when a lens will reproduce an object the same size on film/sensor as it is in life.
Micro is for smaller subjects at higher magnifications such as using a microscope.
NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
Hey that’s pretty cool. Is it really what happens?
ma11en@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yep, most macro lenses such as the 90 to 105 range from Sigma, Canon, Nikon and their ilk tend to have a designation like 1:1 in the description.
This is normally based on a 35mm frame size, for cropped sensors the magnification is greater.
AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Depends, I think. In the same order of magnitude definitely.