Re: full-frame CMOS non-DSLR

"Chris Brown" <cpbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:nuln53-f03.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In article <gsvho1lms68h7o350h106om3vuu05qfl2s@xxxxxxx>, Rich <dfs>
> wrote:
>>On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 20:35:17 GMT, Chris Brown
>
> [Flektogon]
>
>>Funny you mention the Zeiss. It and Leitz lenses HAVE been subsituted
>>for the Canon WAs in ORDER to get good results. Maybe special (your
>>word) is incorrect? How about "properly designed?"
>
> Bear in mind it's a Zeiss Jena (i.e. DDR), but this particular one is oft
> regarded as a gem. I think you're right about the "properly designed"
> thing
> - it'd work better on film as well. This nonsense about "digital lenses"
> is
> just that. What's special about the so-called "digital lenses" is that the
> image circle beyond the APS-C sensor-size is either rubbish or
> non-existent,
> and this makes them cheaper and maybe a bit lighter. They're not
> "optimised
> for digital", they're optimised for a small frame.

A case in point would be the Olympus Zuiko 35-100 f2. It is equivalent to a
35mm frame 70-200 and its dimensions are similar to the Canon 70-200 f2.8L,
both have a 77mm filter diameter, which implies that Oly built a big enough
lens that they could simply ignore the edges and use the small center
section, rather than design a lens that took advantage of the smaller sensor
to produce a more compact lens. Length is 8.4", diameter is 3.8" and
weight, without tripod collar, is 58.2 ozs. The Canon 70-200 f2.8L (non IS)
is 7.6" in length, 3.3" in dia. and weighs 44.8 ozs. And costs $1100 vs
$2500 for the Zuiko, by the way.
Yes, it's a full stop faster, but doesn't it need to be to compensate for
the depth of field of the Canon's larger sensor?
Considering how good the images are from my 70-200, I'm not sure how
"optimized" a lens can get for small digital sensors.
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: full-frame CMOS non-DSLR
    ... >>>Funny you mention the Zeiss. ... It and Leitz lenses HAVE been subsituted ... rather than design a lens that took advantage of the smaller sensor ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: description of camera design I would like to have
    ... element and the sensor than is current practice with DSLRs. ... The specifics are that when Leica decided ... Leica is the only major manufacturer of interchangeable lens 35mm ... on their specific design. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Camera For Photographing Animals?
    ... telextender's primary lens' aperture compensates for it. ... over a larger sensor. ... a pocketable high-quality camera and 1248mm ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Nikon and Megapixels
    ... If you take a photo with a 50 million pixel sensor using a milk bottle bottom for a lense you get a huge file of a crap low res image. ... In effect, what the formula says is that no matter how good the lens, ... But when the lens performance lags so far behind the sensor already as most zooms, all lenses at f16 etc do then theres not much if any actual image improvement by improving the sensor further! ... You CANNOT increase thew resolution from a lens by having a bigger pixel count. ...
    (alt.photography)
  • Re: Focus calibration
    ... AF sensors and imaging sensor are at different ... Yes, the AF system gets the focus perfect and the lens either backtracks or continues as the mirror rises, to a position which is not exactly that of the AF focused point. ... The latest lenses have more accurate distance encoding and can be adjusted better. ... So adjusting the dioptre for dead sharp view of the focus markings may not mean you are focusing on the screen itself, and with modern semi-clear screens, that can lead to poor manual focusing accuracy. ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)