View Single Post

Old 10-09-2019   #9
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by nzeeman View Post
i mean i think it has more to do with distance from sensor because in p&s cameras we saw some pretty amazing low number of elements 35mm lenses and still pretty free of distortion across whole full frame...

Non-retrofocus wide angles can be quite good with few elements if slow, and yes they need to be close to the film, so don't work on SLRs, nor do they work well on any digital cameras because the light hits the sensor at too low angles (except the Leicas that are equipped with special micro-lens arrays in front of the sensor). Wide angles for mirrorless digital cameras are retrofocus, just not by as much as SLR lenses.



Quote:
Originally Posted by nzeeman View Post
so you say that we could replicate any full frame design?
You mean scaled down? Why not? Of course at the extremes there will be limitations in manufacturing, and some corrections have to be re-calculated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzeeman View Post
and for example make super fast 35mm tessar?
Why? Tessars are not very suited to high speed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzeeman View Post
im not sure because we would already see all that in movie industry that already use half frame in 35mm movies, and also we would see it in many half frame cameras before...
What is it exactly that you think we don't see? Fast cine lenses?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzeeman View Post
and one edit to.make it clear- if lens is 35mm yes field of view will be normal on aps-c but all problems that wide angle have will stay-like distortions and all - you wont get portrait lens realistic perspective with 35mm if you use it on 4/3 and has FOV of 70mm you will basically have just middle of wide image kn your sensor .
This is false, if I understand you correctly. Just try it empirically if you can't wrap your head around this in theory.
  Reply With Quote