Digital lenses

-4.5 Would the digital lenses offer much less distorted picture than the 17-28 'analogue' ;-) lens? (*)o(*) Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Digital lenses

have personal experience with all of the following lenses, but from what you know how would you rank (sharpness distortion) the following lenses? Sigma Digital 18-50mm F/3.5-5.6 Pentax SMCP-DA 16-45mm F4 ED-AL Also, we currently have Fisheye Zoom 17-28mm f/3.5-4.5 Would the digital lenses

Re: Digital lenses

-DA 16-45mm F4 ED-AL Also, we currently have Fisheye Zoom 17-28mm f/3.5-4.5 Would the digital lenses offer much less distorted picture than the 17-28 'analogue' ;-) lens? (*)o(*) Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Digital lenses

On 28 Feb 2004 at 21:45, mapson wrote: Also, we currently have Fisheye Zoom 17-28mm f/3.5-4.5 Would the digital lenses offer much less distorted picture than the 17-28 'analogue' ;-) lens? Given that the new lens is a rectilinear design not a fisheye then yes it won't produce

Re: Digital lenses

I understand that nobody may have personal experience with all of the following lenses, but from what you know how would you rank (sharpness distortion) the following lenses? Sigma Digital 18-50mm F/3.5-5.6 Pentax SMCP-DA 16-45mm F4 ED-AL Be guided by the price. Lenses are priced according

Re: Digital lenses (WAS: Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist))

At 03:44 PM 6/10/2003 +0200, Pål Jensen wrote: This could also be a factor behind why Pentax would limit 20+ year old lenses on the *ist D. Perhaps they aren't realy suited for a DSLR? Another matter is that there are probably other criterias in optical performance that is more important in a

Re: Digital lenses (WAS: Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist))

I believe digital lenses is Sigma marketing wording made up for certain lenses (particularly wide angles) designed to project parallel rays of light on the focus plane. Apparently the industry is close to overcome this restriction with sensors less sensitive to incident angle

RE: Digital lenses

Me no camera engineer, But doesn't the smaller size of the digital array sensor in the DSLRs compared to 35mm film mean that the array is only looking at the center portion of a normal lens's optical cone, normally the sweet spot? Kinda like using a medium format lens on a 35mm camera? Dumb 'ol

Re: Digital lenses (WAS: Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist))

You're reaching, and you it's unbecoming. The argument about special digital lenses was disposed of long ago. At 03:44 PM 6/10/03 +0200, you wrote: Jens wrote: Hi Pål Speaking about digital phoitogrphy - isn't the limits to the possible resolution set be the CCD, rather than by the lens

RE: Digital lenses

From: Thomas Haller Sent: 10 June 2003 16:43 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Digital lenses Me no camera engineer, But doesn't the smaller size of the digital array sensor in the DSLRs compared to 35mm film mean that the array is only looking at the center portion of a normal lens's

Re: Digital lenses (WAS: Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist))

some of the characteristics of the limited lenses I´ve been wondering if they were not constructed having the MZ-D in mind DagT På tirsdag, 10. juni 2003, kl. 17:50, skrev Peter Alling: You're reaching, and you it's unbecoming. The argument about special digital lenses was disposed of long

Re: Digital Lenses

Well, there you go, the EOS 1DS is as good as a Nikon Coolscan 8000. William Robb Same thing I thought. Lukasz --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Szukasz banku bez prowizji ? mBank - zaloz konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank

Re: Digital Lenses

On 6 Mar 2003 at 13:38, Lukasz Kacperczyk wrote: Well, there you go, the EOS 1DS is as good as a Nikon Coolscan 8000. William Robb Same thing I thought. Maybe their LS-8000 was misaligned :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Digital Lenses

Hi Cyril, I'd assume you translated that properly, but I didn't ask for another Nikon scanner test Feroze - Original Message - From: Cyril MARION [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:34 AM Subject: RE: Digital Lenses Rob wrote : Hi Cyril

Re: Digital Lenses

[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:38 AM Subject: RE: Digital Lenses You really shuld gather a little more information before you make your judgement. My experience has shown that a 6 meg sensor compares favorably to 35mm film. As always, the proof

Re: Digital Lenses

film and batteries on me. Wheres the favourable comparison in that real world scenario? Feroze - Original Message - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:38 AM Subject: RE: Digital Lenses You really shuld gather a little more information before

Re: Digital Lenses

Agreed, its still another $1500 for a decent notebook, can't see myself walking with my desktop :) How fast is firewire v/s USB2 Feroze - Original Message - From: Ryan K. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:18 PM Subject: Re: Digital Lenses

Re: Digital Lenses

- From: Ryan K. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:18 PM Subject: Re: Digital Lenses Some DSLRs allow tethered shooting, where you save the images directly to your computer over firewire, etc. -Ryan Feroze Kistan wrote: Hi Tom, I'm trying

RE: Digital Lenses

-Original Message- From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Say you do your homework, and you get all your camera settings *exactly* right. Digital labs will give you a discount for drop printing. This is where you send the scan, and they print it without correction. The savings on

Re: Digital Lenses

: Digital Lenses I don't know the stats but several times faster from my experience, at least on some things. At 11:20 PM 3/2/2017 +0200, you wrote: Agreed, its still another $1500 for a decent notebook, can't see myself walking with my desktop :) How fast is firewire v/s USB2

Re: Digital Lenses

JPEGs are not fragile at all. they are misused by the novice. every time you save a JPEF file from an image editing program, it recompresses the image. since JPEG is a lossy compress algorithm, that means each save throws away more of the image. i set my digital camera to capture at the least

Digital Lenses

I have been following the digital debate for some time now, but some of the things I don't understand are : 1] A DSLR needs a lens of a higher resolution capability than a film lens? Yes/No 2] All else being equal a 11-14MP DSLR image equals or betters a 35mm scan in some instances? Yes/No 3] If

Re: Digital Lenses

At 10:01 PM 3/1/2017 +0200, you wrote: I have been following the digital debate for some time now, but some of the things I don't understand are : 1] A DSLR needs a lens of a higher resolution capability than a film lens? Yes/No Either would benefit from a lens of higher resolution but once you

Re: Digital Lenses

- Original Message - From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 10:40 PM Subject: Re: Digital Lenses Hi Peter 2] All else being equal a 11-14MP DSLR image equals or betters a 35mm scan in some instances? Yes/No It would depend

Re: Digital Lenses

At 11:26 PM 3/1/2017 +0200, Feroze wrote: - Original Message - From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 10:40 PM Subject: Re: Digital Lenses Hi Peter snip however the answer is no. I don't, I think there is more to the quality

RE: Digital Lenses

Hello Feroze, I am not a profesionnal nor an expert, but from reading some photo magazines and because of my interrest in digital photography, I think I can put these personnal humble opinions to the community : 1] A DSLR needs a lens of a higher resolution capability than a film lens? YES,

RE: Digital Lenses

On 5 Mar 2003 at 22:53, Cyril MARION wrote: 2] All else being equal a 11-14MP DSLR image equals or betters a 35mm scan in some instances? YES, recent tests in Réponses Photo (dec. 2002) have proven that Canon EOS 1D images are sharper than 24x36 film images and are more comparable with

Re: Digital Lenses

PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 17:58 Subject: Re: Digital Lenses That is why on my wish list for features on the * ist-D is 16 bit color, at least in raw, preferably in tiff and highest quality jpeg also.

Re: Digital Lenses

I guess that those I really want to save I should move onto my H.D. and thence to something like Graphic Converter, and save immediately as TIFF files. Then I can manipulate them without degrading them... I'm really an amateur at all this, but do read horror stories about how 'fragile' JPEG files

Re: Digital Lenses

If you want to compare image quality, then look at the details in the digital image on a computer monitor, zoom as much as you want, do whatever. For the film camera, use a good slide film and examine the details with a good loupe or microscope or whatever. Just don't print the digital or scan

Digital Lenses

There was a good article on schneider's site about digital lenses; a definitive research into that is on http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/scandetail.html

Re: Digital Lenses

- From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 21:20 Subject: Re: Digital Lenses How do JPEG2000 and JPEG (Exif 2.2), such as the OptioS stores it's images, compare? That's one not-so-good thing about the OptioS, or the Optio 450 or the 550

Re: Digital Lenses

Message - From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 21:54 Subject: Re: Digital Lenses I guess that those I really want to save I should move onto my H.D. and thence to something like Graphic Converter, and save immediately as TIFF files

Re: Digital Lenses

: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 23:20 Subject: Re: Digital Lenses Does anyone know if actions are available on Elements? BTW, JPEG only degrades if you open, manipulate and save, so if you save your originals by burning a CD, and close the session, then the image on the CD itself can not be degraded.