Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 4/3'rds, why no "standard" lens?

Subject: Re: [OM] 4/3'rds, why no "standard" lens?
From: "Ralf Loi" <ralf_loi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 14:00:25 +0100

I can't agree. FOV is for "normal" subject (landscapes, etc) not for macro.
If you think in terms of reproduction ratio, it is another story. The
50/3.5 macro does 1:2 at 23 cm (if I remember corretly), it means that an
object at that distance will be reproduced at half the size on the focal
plane - no matter what size is the sensor/film! For the 90/2 the same
happens at 40 cm - again, the size of sensor/films doesn't matter. These
distances are not the working distance, but are related to.
I suspect the 50mm macro for the 4/3 system will work the same as "our" 50
macro, so working distance in the field can be difficult.

Ralf Loi

chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote

Depends on how you interprete it, since the FOV of 100mm lens in 35mm
system
is equal to 50mm lens in 4/3 system. That means for the same object you
will need the same working distance for both. If you are satisfy with
working distance of 100mm macro lens in 35mm system it will be the same for
50mm lens in 4/3 system, that is simple math.

C.H.Ling

----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> Jan, you are saying Repro ratio when you are talking about FOV. The
> example is a clear one, but don't you have your example backwards? A
> 100mm lens on 35mm covers roughly the same FOV as a 50mm on a 4/3
> sensor. It's the same as the way the 'standard' fl for 6x7 cm is about
> twice that for 35mm.  It seems to me that Skip is right, that will be a
> problem for macro work in the field.
>
> Moose
>






< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz