Hell, many Canon WA lenses, (all WA lenses on 35mm to some extent, but
Canon has some of the worst, and most expensive), were problematic on
film as far as vignetting was concerned. Why would they be "better" on
Digital? I think that Leica partly picked the 1.3x crop Kodak sensor
so their price would be merely astronomical not "US Federal Budget" sized.
William Robb wrote:
> This arrived in my inbox. I think it was meant to go to the list
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bronek Kozicki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
>
>
>
>> Quoting William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>> It will affect them to a certain extent, depending on the numbers.
>>> Most people aren't looking past the megapixel count.
>>>
>>> OTOH places like DPReview will trash APS-C cameras as soon as full frame
>>> becomes viable to
>>> the general market, probably in the next breath after trashing the full
>>> frame cameras for poor corner performance.
>>>
>> has anyone seen "full frame" camera without severe vignetting with wide
>> lenses?
>> All "big" Canons suffer from this issue (to various degree), and
>> apparently
>> this is exactly why Leica M8 is "cropped" and not "full frame". If Sony
>> goes
>> this way, it is only for marketing hype. And as we keep increasing sensor
>> size,
>> why not go twice as large, to 36x48 (cropped 645)? I do not think that
>> manufacturing cost of such big sensor would exceed $1000 .
>>
>>
>> B.
>>
>
>
>
--
--
The more I know of men, the more I like my dog.
-- Anne Louise Germaine de Stael
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
