I understand what you're saying... I just don't understand WHY you're saying it... what counts in photography is the image, not necessarially which lens/body/sensor combination one uses.
You know, if Pentax had come out with a new substantial digital lens line up at the same time as the *ist D, we all might have foolishly emptied our wallets. But they didn't. So Pentax inadverently saved us all some money. Hopefuly it's money that will be a downpayment towards a FF digital body at some point for me.
The long term future is that individuals will continue to put whatever lens they choose on a body with a compatible mount, and if the results are pleasing, they will continue to use it.
The fact that a FF lens is more closely suited to a FF sensor, and that an APS lens is more closely suited to an APS sensor is only stating the obvious.
What would be inefficient is to throwaway/stop using perfectly satisfactory lenses simply because the new ones 'match' the form factor or because they are a few ounces lighter.
It's sort of like your punching into the air. The truth is FF lenses work on APS sensors and in most cases spectacularly so.
Tom C.
From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Small-sensor DSLR probably not a stop-gap Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 14:31:42 -0500
You don't get it. I said LONG TERM it wont last. It is a good stop gap to be able to use your existing lenses but to use 35mm lenses on APS is very inefficient, all the lenses are heavier costlier, and generally lower performance than necessary for a APS sensor. I believe the long term future is FF sensor for 35mm lenses and/or APS sensor using APS lenses as they are both more efficient use of of optical technology and economically more efficient too.
JCO
-----Original Message----- From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 2:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Small-sensor DSLR probably not a stop-gap
All I have to say is BOLOGNA!!! Don't tell me it's inefficient to use a
35mm lens on an *ist D when myself and many others have been doing it since the get-go. All I have are 35mm FF lenses and I'm quite happy with them.
In fact, the ability to use FF existing lenses on the digital APS-sized sensor body is the sole reason, I'm sure, that many of us purchased the body to begin. It's why Pentax made it compatible with K-mounts.
Who cares about so-called efficency if it works and we're satified with the results? It's like me saying you're 4x5's are inefficent because you expend extra calories lugging it around, spend too much time changing film, and it uses way too much film when the image could be captured in a smaller format. What does efficiency really matter when what one really cares about is the end result?
Tom C.
>From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Small-sensor DSLR probably not a stop-gap >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 13:52:03 -0500 > >Yes it is, the flange distance is too long >causing the retrofocus factor to me absurdly >higher than necessary with wide angles. And all the lenses >are compromised in terms of size weight and performance. >You don't use P67 lenses on 35mm cameras and it really >isnt that good to be using 35mm lenses on APS sensors. >JCO > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 1:36 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Small-sensor DSLR probably not a stop-gap > > >JC wrote: > > > > >I have no idea IF this is going to happen or WHEN > >but it seems to me that a 35mm FF camera lens used > >on a APS sensor is really inefficient and wont last long term. > > > >JCO > > > > >It's not inefficient at all if you already own the 35mm FF lens. Sure >you collect a couple trillion photons that never hit the sensor, but >they were >free to begin with. That's where a lot of us are coming from. > > > > >Tom C. > >
