I don't see why not, after all that is all a retrofocus lens is, a negative telephoto. As you say vignetting in the main lens is the problem faced in full frame versions, but you might be able to get one to work with a small sensor. The problem from a manufacture's viewpoint is some idiot would sue them because it did not work on their full frame camera.


Peter Loveday wrote:


I was thinking about the *istD last night (which I seem to do a lot of these
days :), and thought of something; is it possible to make a 0.67x TC for it?
I'm not talking about some wide-angle adapter on the end of the lens, but
exactly the same principle as the 1.4x and 2.0x TCs that currently exist.

I would assume the major limitation with making a <1.0 TC has always been
lack of image circle beyone the outside of the lens?  This is not the case
with the *istD, as there is plenty of image circle spare.  Is there
something I'm missing here, or can this be done?  And if so, why hasn't
anyon (Canon, Nikon) already done it...  I for one would pay good money for
such a convertor.

And the really good bit... it seems to me, with this TC you would actually
GAIN just over stop of light?  As it would effectively be squashing  the
35mm image circle into the APS sensor size, all the original light would be
gained, but in a smaller area.  Which makes sense anyway, given that
apertures are relative to F stop.  Then I could choose between my FA50/1.4
as a nice portrait lens, with FOV crop, or a normal lens at F1.0....  Or
perhaps an A50/1.2, or would that be A50/.85...

So is any of this possible, or have I missed some fatal problem in the whole
idea?  If it is, Pentax, please make one!  I'd buy one, and I'm sure many
other users would too.

Perhaps Cotty could rig something up with custom engineering and a FA1.4xS
adapter mounted backwards? :)

Love, Light and Peace,
- Peter Loveday
Director of Development, eyeon Software



-- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com

"You might as well accept people as they are,
you are not going to be able to change them anyway."




Reply via email to