On 9 Jun 2001, at 19:47, Pål Jensen wrote:
When designating equal lenses (MF and 35mm) I was thinking of overall
performance. Eg the two lenses projects the same information content (total
number of lines for instance) but on circles with different size.
I think that this is where our
Pål Jensen wrote:
Isaac wrote:
It's easy, you can't change a lens' illumination angle. Coverage of a
lens is defined by its illumination angle, not the size of the circle of
illumination. If what you say above is true, I should be able to shoot
8x10 film with my SMC 50mm f1.4, and I
On 6 Jun 2001, at 14:14, Pål Jensen wrote:
But the point in this debate is that when using a MF lens on a 35mm camera you
will actually decrease the resolution of the lens practically speaking. An MF
lens will perform worse on a 35mm camera than on a MF camera. The resolution of
the lens
Pål Jensen wrote:
Isaac wrote:
Except the fact that the camera/lens combo would be rather awkward
because of the larger lenses, no autofocus and stop down metering, there
would be no compromises... Seriously though, I can't see many pros
putting up with those limitations on a really
My dream as a 645 owner would be a digital film insert with the 6 Mpix chip.
If using the same lenses, why change the tool?
With the 6 Mpix chip it will give the same situation
as the Nikon/Canon users have today, with a chip smaller than the film
format.
Except that it will be easier to
William wrote:
HUH? By that arguement, my 210mm NikkorW should only resolve
about 8 LPPM. I know for a fact it resolves closer to 60 on the
film. Format doesn't matter.
Isn't 60 lines pr MM remarkably bad for a lens for the 35mm system?
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss
Tom wrote:
Resolving power is not spread over the image (lenses are
essentially holographic devices). The medium format lens
simply has a wider field of view.
I don't get this. I'm no optical engineer but unconceivable to me how you can double
cover area without doubling optical defects
Hello
it seems to be true, as far as the Phillips CCD is very slow to refresh
itself, expensive regard to small size 6Meg.
Well I hope MZ Digital will existe as soon as possible even with a smaller
CCD, because it will mean that Pentax has to devellop a 17-35mm f/:2.8 zoom
See you
[EMAIL
From what I've gathered, the project has not stopped - just gone into shock
at the realization of what the actual retail price might be. Ever since
Photokina the figure $7,000 has been tossed around. As far as I can tell,
Pentax has NEVER officially announced this price - it seems that it was
Rob wrote:
There is no truth in the statement the MF lenses have lower MTF values
either,
Whatever resolving power a MF lens has it has to be distributed over a larger area
than a 35mm lens.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
???
Resolving power is not spread over the image (lenses are
essentially holographic devices). The medium format lens
simply has a wider field of view. Older MF lenses may not
have been as highly corrected as 35 mm lenses, but in these
days of CAD/CAM the resolving power of the lenses are
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen
Subject: Re: Medium Format to 35 (WAS: Digital MZ - MR 52 projet
still in the air ???)
Rob wrote:
There is no truth in the statement the MF lenses have lower
MTF values
either,
Whatever resolving power a MF lens has it has
- Original Message -
From: Tom Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: June 4, 2001 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: Medium Format to 35 (WAS: Digital MZ - MR 52 projet
still in the air ???)
???
Resolving power is not spread over the image (lenses are
essentially holographic
Hmmm... Didn't think of that. Good point.
Todd
At 04:33 PM 6/3/01 +1000, you wrote:
What about all the pros with Pentax Medium format gear surely the 6M pixel
body coupled with a lens adaptor would be of interest?
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go
I believe the main purpose of a digital slr at this state is to signalize
that the
K-mount will be taken over into the digital age and that customers can
continue
buying K-mount cameras and lenses knowing that their system will be
compatible with up-to-date digital cameras.
I just recently
On 4 Jun 2001, at 0:31, Pål Jensen wrote:
Todd wrote:
It should perform quite well, as you are just using the center of the image
produced by the lens, which is where most lenses perorm best.
They still show visible light fall-off at the corners at wide apertures. Also,
when used on
Hello
One of my friend tells me that the Digital MZ shown at the PMA is no more
devellop ! The projet is stopped, aborted...
Does anybody know something about this ?
See you
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com
digital SLR.
Say it aint so!
Ryan Brooks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=113369
- Original Message -
From: Pentax Clover [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 4:13 PM
Subject: Digital MZ - MR 52 projet still in the air
Sounds like total bull to me
Pål
- Original Message -
From: Pentax Clover [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:13 PM
Subject: Digital MZ - MR 52 projet still in the air ???
Hello
One of my friend tells me that the Digital MZ shown at the PMA
Troll alert!
--Tom
Pentax Clover wrote:
Hello
One of my friend tells me that the Digital MZ shown at the PMA is no more
devellop ! The projet is stopped, aborted...
Does anybody know something about this ?
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
I don't know if it's true or not, but it makes sense as I don't think there
is a big enough market for a $7,000 K-mount camera to make it worthwhile.
What Pentax needs to do is build the K1000 of digital SLRs - cheap,
dependable, and simple. They'd probably sell truckloads of them.
Todd
At
Actually it is a $1000 digital camera, the 22mm x 34mm ccd
is what you pay the other six grand for. I have said it
here before, and say it again. The only camera on the market
in that category right now is the Kodak DCS 460/560. They
recently dropped the price to $15,, so how do you feel
22 matches
Mail list logo
