On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 05:40:42PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > ff bodies don't need as high a peformance lenses as APS > bodies do to achieve same level of system peformance. > That's the main appeal of FF bodies. No super tweeked, > super performance leneses are required, mortal lenses > can be applied to them for same results due to larger sensor format.
So why are the Nikon full frame lenses so much more expensive than their APS lenses? Could it be easier to make lenses that are really good over an area that is half as big as it is to make a lens that is decent over the larger area? Alternatively, is it possible that that is only true if the full frame sensor doesn't have the same pixel size as the smaller sensor, that customers who have bought into the resolution hype, are not going to settle for the same resolution in a bigger sensor, but with twice the sensor area will want twice the resolution? Or maybe Nikon just figures that they can get more money from people willing to pay $2500 for a body. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen [email protected] http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
