On 5/19/2013 10:51 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 20 May 2013 12:44, J.C. O'Connell <[email protected]> wrote:
The simple physics is that if the FF sensor is 50% longer than the APSC
sensor in both dimensions,
the FF lens only needs to provide 2/3 the resolution of the APSC lens
to match the overall system resolution. If the FF lens approaches the
quality of the APSC lens, then a near doubling of system resolution can
be achieved. What this means in real world terms is that you dont need
"super world class" lenses on FF to get great results, unlike with APCS
sized sensors.
Look at the MTF diagram of most any lens designed to cover a FF lens
and note the fall off in resolution/contrast 2/3 from the centre of
the frame, the APS sensors very conveniently disregard this area of
poor performance.
--
Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio
yes, most FF lenses do have less sharpness in the corners, but as long
as its not less than 2/3 of
a drop off, there is no overall system loss of resolution compared to a
APSC lens/sensor system
with no corner dropoff whatsoever. Its similar to large format film vs
smaller format film. The larger
the format, the less critical the lens becomes because the absolute
resolution of the lens times
the area covered is still more than a small format area used with a high
resolution lens.
--
J.C. O'Connell
[email protected]
--
--
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.
