Wayne Harridge wrote:
>> Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> No matter how you slice it, a 17mm lens is difficult to make in any format.
>> Had they designed it for optical
>> performance, the lens would be comparable in size to an old Zuiko 24/2.8
>>
I'm with Wayne on this one. Making a 17mm lens for 4/3 size film would
be pretty straightforward, a nice little D-G would do, and much simpler
than making a retrofocus 24/2.8 for FF film.
In the case at hand, as you say in your detail, the problem is the
sensor. If the sensor requires relatively parallel rays striking it,
then the lens design becomes more complex, probably relatively large,
heavy and retrofocus. But that's a specific problem, not a general
problem with that focal length in all uses.
It will be interesting to see if the problem seen in the one image is
general and if firmware can fix it.
Moose
>> Dunno about that Ken !
>>
>> What about the lenses for 16mm movie cameras, the coverage requirements are
>> similar and there have been high quality lenses available for much longer
>> than my lifetime.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|