There is no magical size/weight advantage

Started Mar 5, 2014 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Contributing MemberPosts: 976Gear list
I Believe in Magic . . . ;)
In reply to IVN, Mar 5, 2014

No offense intended, but this thread is confusing at best, and not true. I am no optics expert (just an engineer with a photography habit), but these kinds of posts rub me the wrong way to the point where I have to respond.

1) Yes there is a size advantage, and no it isn't magic, just simple physics, the physics of needed less glass (and mass) to cast a smaller light circle with the same light density falling on the sensor (photos/sq cm)

2) Rather than try to argue further the physics, I will give real world examples that prove my point

Nikon 1 32mm f1.2 (2.58x1.85in) vs Nikon DX 35mm f1.8 (2.8x2.1in) - the f1.2 lens is slightly smaller than its DX equivalent despite the ~ 1 stop advantage

Nikon 105mm f2.8 Macro (3.3x4.6in) vs Pana 35-100mm f2.8 (2.7x3.9in) again, advantage smaller format

Have to cut this short as I am being called to a meeting

 razormac's gear list:razormac's gear list
Nikon 1 V2 Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow