Is Full frame still the most versatile?

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Discussions thread
Martin.au
Senior MemberPosts: 6,112Gear list
Like?
Re: Evidence for masters of Latin maxims Re: Is Full frame still the most versatile?
In reply to plevyadophy, Apr 2, 2013

plevyadophy wrote:

coudet wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

Now, care to explain why distortion isn't a significant issue on a Pana LX7, with its 4.7mm lens for 24mm FF?

Perhaps I can help you with that.

Compacts typically have monstrous distortion, it's just automatically corrected without you knowing anything about it. Here is LX7 without correction:

Spot on, and that's pretty much what I was saying but s/he wouldn't take notice, perhaps due to being too busy preparing the next Latin maxim to spout.

Ok. I went and looked at quite a few of the Olympus lenses from their 4/3 systems in the 9-14mm range, from their kit lenses to their SHG glass. All of them had comparable distortion to their FF focal length equivalent.

I also note that while the LX7 at 4.7mm has a fair bit of barrel distortion at 17.7mm (which as per your logic should also have a fair bit of barrel distortion as 18mm is still a very wide angle lens in FF, it has instead, a tiny bit of pincushion.

Now, just to be clear, I'm perfectly happy with the idea that as FOV increases, distortion (typically barrel) increases. and also the opposite, where as FOV decreases you often see pincushion distortion.

However, I don't think that it's the lens focal length that determines this, but rather the field of view.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow