Professional Web Applications Themes

Big glass extinction? - Photography

Your sentiments were probably best illustrated by Canon's switchover to the EOS system. The format didn't change, but those who had a sizeable collection of FD glass were up the creek. But Canon made the change anyway, and as we can all see now, it was ultimately the right decision. I suspect we WILL see smaller sensors and formats that somehow are at least as good as the full frame formats we have now. Wouldn't it be nice to actually be able to carry a big gun lens without breaking your back? A 600 2.8 equivalent is definitely in the ...

  1. #1

    Default Re: Big glass extinction?

    Your sentiments were probably best illustrated by Canon's switchover to the
    EOS system. The format didn't change, but those who had a sizeable
    collection of FD glass were up the creek. But Canon made the change anyway,
    and as we can all see now, it was ultimately the right decision. I suspect
    we WILL see smaller sensors and formats that somehow are at least as good as
    the full frame formats we have now. Wouldn't it be nice to actually be able
    to carry a big gun lens without breaking your back? A 600 2.8 equivalent is
    definitely in the realm of possibility. Time will tell.
    "Thomas E. Witte" <photojmindspring.com> wrote in message
    news:7a7e0cba.0307070707.f4346aeposting.google.co m...
    > "pioe[rmv]" <"pioe[rmv]"coldsiberia.org> wrote in message
    news:<3F06880E.9090902coldsiberia.org>...
    > > Thomas E. Witte wrote:
    > >
    > > > You don't want a smaller sensor due to "digital conversion"... Sort
    > > > of like a tele converter. My 1D has a 1.3 conversion ratio and it's a
    > > > love hate relationship. I like it for football because I use my 600
    > > > with is and get a 780mm f/4.... Or do I?
    > >
    > > This can be remedied by another lens construction that changes the
    > > angular relationship between the sensor and the lens. But even so, the
    > > smaller the sensor the greater the difficulties with noise, heating
    > > and ultimate quality.
    >
    > I thought I sent this last week, but it never showed up.
    >
    > Heat and noise should be the least of your worries... You mentioned
    > the big problem right off the bat... New lenses and lens
    > construction. It's like buying a smaller car, then rebuilding your
    > entire garage to fit it more snugly. I'd much rather spend $5000 on a
    > full frame body to work with my current lenses, then spend $28,000 on
    > all new lenses to fit a smaller sensor. Folks already freak out
    > whenever Canon changes their mounts.
    >
    > If you only have a few grand tied up in lenses then it's obviously not
    > that big of an issue for you, but I've got a substantial investment in
    > gear that I simply can't imagine needing to replace.
    >
    > Thomas E. Witte
    >
    > GO Photography
    > Cincinnati and Midwest
    > [url]www.mindspring.com/~photoj[/url]
    >

    Wes J Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Big glass extinction?

    Years ago Zeiss produced a lens with an intensifier. It did indeed have a
    rated extremely small f stop. Sorry I can't remember all the particulars,
    but there were several VERY exotic Zeiss optics then. Like Nikon's
    1200-1700 zoom, sales were almost non-existent, so they were discontinued.
    "William Graham" <weg9comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:NImOa.943$GL4.118rwcrnsc53...
    >
    > Michael Moore <m.mooreNOSPAMutoronto.ca> wrote in message
    > news:3F094C28.2070103NOSPAMutoronto.ca...
    > > Dean Van Praotl wrote:
    > > > "William Graham" <weg9comcast.net> apparently said:
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >>Why don't they rate binoculars with the f-stop, like they do lenses?
    > Then
    > > >>you could judge the brightness of the image the same as you do with
    your
    > > >>lenses.....
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > The exit pupil is another way of expressing the same thing,
    > > > but it is more useful in comparing the relative brightness of
    > > > binoculars of differing magnifications.
    > >
    > > But even with the same size exit pupil, I thought two
    > > different models of binoculars can still, nonetheless, vary
    > > in brightness. For example, one may have a good
    > > multicoating on all surfaces and an excellent prism and the
    > > other not. Also, insofar as the exit pupil of the
    > > binoculars exceeds the input pupil size of the person, then
    > > it would seem that brightness would not be increased.
    > >
    > > --
    > > M2
    > >
    > Hummmm......I wonder if binoculars equipped with these light intensifiers
    > would have negative f-stops? - Or, perhaps f-stops that were very near
    zero?
    >
    >
    >

    Wes J Guest

Similar Threads

  1. Web Page Looking Glass ??
    By Graham Mattingley in forum ASP
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 29th, 01:17 AM
  2. Photos through glass
    By Gary Morrison in forum Photography
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: August 11th, 07:53 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139