Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 15:23:41 -0800
From: Jim Brokaw <jbrokaw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] size of the 4/3 E-system lens size 300/2.8
on 3/2/03 4:06 PM, Pandionhalietius@xxxxxxx at Pandionhalietius@xxxxxxx
wrote:
In a message dated 3/2/2003 3:50:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> wincros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Yes, but its not a '300mm' lens, its a 600mm lens. That lens produces the
same image magnification as a 600mm lens for 35mm format... compare the size
of this 4/3 system 300/2.8 to the 600/4.0 Nikon or Canon lenses for 35mm
format. It's much less than 1/2 the size.
Those who have seen a 600mm lens for 35mm format will appreciate the huge
(pun intended) difference in size for the same image magnification. I bet
Mike Veglia, Mike Butler and Stephen Scharf are looking very closely at
this...
Yeah, I looked at the photos on DP Review, and I have been reading
the threads on this list, and I am a bit puzzled. Maybe some list
members can clarify for me.
I take it the sensor for 4/3 is roughly 1/2 the size of 35 mm film?
So that if (hypothetically speaking) a 35 mm Zuiko legacy lens were
mountable on a 4/3 DSLR there would be a 2X effective magnification?
I had heard, or read that Olympus was going to be basing the lenses
for the new DSLR on some pre-existing Zuiko designs that would be
adapted for the first go-round for use. That big honker of a lens
looks to be a 35 mm equivalent of a 300/2.8, is that right? And with
the 2X conversion factor, it would be functionally a 600 mm/2.8?
Still looks pretty big.
As for looking closely at it, I am taking a wait and see attitude. I
have the same concerns that Tom Scales does about this concept
long-term. It strikes me as an interesting idea, but off-beat in a
typically Olympus-like way. I therefore have concerns about it's
viability as a "pro" platform.
Another concern I have is over the sensor size. If Olympus is
sticking with a fixed-sized sensor (which I presume they would have
to with their dedicated new lens line), then I worry about the
whether they can increase pixel density (over the long haul) without
creating insurmountable noise issues. As I've said before, they've
already taken some pretty hard knocks for noise in their new series
of smaller, 5 megapixel CCDs.
IMHO, the larger the sensor, the better. Also, CMOS is coming on
incredibly strongly of late, and the latest CMOS sensors in the
cameras e.g. the DCS 14, 1Ds, D60 and 10D are providing some quite
stunning results.
They also require less power (longer battery life) and have less
noise than CCD's.
As for big glass, I've found the best solution is to use a 300/2.8
with a 2X teleconvertor. With the 1.6X conversion factor, that give
me a reach of 960 mm. And believe me, there are times when I need it.
Here is an example shot:
http://photos.imageevent.com/puma_cat/motorcyclephotos//BenLST2Web.jpg
-Stephen
--
2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic!
< 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 >
|
