On Mon, 15 Feb 1999, Marco Tomat wrote:
> Let's imagine a 50 3,5 Zuiko macro lens. It can reach, say, a resolution of
> 80 lines / mm, of a very high contrasted subject. Let's reduce this lens to
> a 1/3 in all dimensions: we'll get a 17 3,5 Zuiko macro lens, of the total
> size and weight of 1/27 of the OM one. Of course this new small lens shall
> resolve at least 80*3 that is 240 lines / mm, being smaller in every
> respect.
Yes, but only in the middle section of the film. The sides of the image
will be junk. But I see your point.
> That is also why Medium Format lenses cannot be compared to Small Format
> ones...
Yes. Large format lenses have to deal with a large image area.
Their design *has to be* different.
OMer
>
> Marco
> ----------
> >Da: William Sommerwerck <williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >A: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Oggetto: [OM] bad dealings; brightness vs. focusing ease; Minox image
> quality; drag and delete
> >Data: Dom, 14 feb 1999 15:16
> >
>
> >Thus we arrive at the point of this posting. The Minox has made me aware
> >just how mediocre even "good" camera lenses are. (The Minox lens is
> >almost certainly superior to the 50mm Summicron -- and that's saying
> >something.) I am now musing over what photographic life would be like if
> >all our 35mm lenses (or at least those in the 40mm to 100mm range) were
> >as highly corrected as the Minox.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|