Sunamer, it's been a very long while since I studied this, so apologies if brain fog creeps in, but this is (hopefully) what was drummed into my thick bonce by my obsessively knowlegeable Theory tutor!
If you hold a small toy car at arm's length its proportions look roughly normal and proportional. Bring it closer until its front end is very close to your eye. It may be out of focus, but you can still tell that the front appears disproportionally large, as with a fish eye lens. Your eye is still using the same lens, but the different viewpoint has changed the perspectival appearance!
OR: if doyll's 3 photos had all been taken with identical distances between building, woman, and camera, then if the wide angle and standard lens shots were to be enlarged proportionally until the woman was exactly the same size in all three, then the perspectival relationship between her and the building would be identical. If her head fitted exactly the size of one window pane in the background of one photo, so it would in the other two.
The reason why there is a different perspectival relationship between the woman and the building in doyll's 3 posted photos is that the camera position has changed.
Anyway, the report suggests the plane was 300 meters away, which is still very close considering the heat and unpredictable nature of fluid flow, great photos!
Perspective is about the visual relationship between objects at different distances, and does not change unless the viewpoint changes