There is no magical size/weight advantage

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
MattZisk
Contributing MemberPosts: 630
Like?
Re: There is no magical size/weight advantage
In reply to olyflyer, 4 months ago

olyflyer wrote:

MattZisk wrote:

Thanks, IVN. I loaded the blog page linked on Nikon rumors in Chrome and translated it (see HERE). There is an example provided that includes size and (if I am reading it correctly) suggests this example lens would be about 9-10 inches in length, which is about double the length of the current Nikon 70-300. The blog page reads:

  • Patent Publication No. 2013-210475
    • Publication date 2013.10.10
    • Filing date 2012.3.30
  • Example 1
    • Focal length f = 72.10-135.70-291.00mm
    • Fno. 4.13-4.5-5.77
    • Angle of view 2ω = 13.0-6.9-3.2 °
    • Image height Y = 8.19mm
    • 229.4-235.8-234.5mm in total length
    • 20 pieces of 13-group lens configuration
    • Six ED glass
    • Three fluorite

At least the length is definitely wrong there. The length of the FX version is 140mm at 70mm FL and 190mm at 300mm FL and I doubt that the Nikon 1 version would be longer, in fact, I'd say it's impossible.

I'm not confident enough to say "impossible" but I agree, it casts some doubt on this patent application as representing what may be in development (I edited my earlier post to add a bit more information I garnered from the application, itself, which may cast further doubt on the correspondence between patent application and actual lens for the N1 -- the numbers quoted in teh blog are what are found in the application, by the way).

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