For a detailed answer why this is happening you can read this answer of mine (shameless plug indeed): In short, the italic correction of the f
has a great part in this. But the italic correction only explains the spacing after the f
, not before. For this you have to look at the bounding boxes of the letters:
The first f
is a text italic letter in its bounding box, the second one is math italic (in its bounding box together with its italic correction). As you can see, the text letter protrudes a bit to the left (and a lot to the right); the math letter has a tiny bit of white space in the left (and also in the right, because of the italic correction). For a bit more about the bounding boxes see this question of mine (another shameless plug :-)
).
I first noticed the problem when typing $Vf$
, which doesn't yield a nice output. My resort is using $V\hspace{-0.1em}f$
instead (in a macro, of course), which I like much better. You could even use $V\!f$
, but this I find too narrow. Compare these three:
I would not encourage you to follow Caramdir's (now removed) suggestion to use $\mathit{Vf}$
since this uses a different font (text italic, not math italic). You can see quite clearly that the V
is narrower (in other words, the angle at the bottom of the V
is more acute):
If you use a different math font (like Euler), then the difference is even more noticeable.
(For a case where \textit
could be a good solution, see this answer of TH.)
\!
to back the spacing up.