There is no magical size/weight advantage

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
olyflyer
Forum ProPosts: 22,739
Like?
Re: What "exactly" is an equivalent lens as regards to the sensor size?
In reply to One_Oldman_4U, 4 months ago

One_Oldman_4U wrote:

olyflyer wrote:

jjoyce wrote:

IVN wrote:

jjoyce wrote:

IVN wrote:

frank-in-toronto wrote:

maybe i'm slow, but the 1 series lenses sure look smaller to me. much smaller.

Which for example?

The majority here got the N1 during the fire sales and found that these cameras are a lot better than the forums and web would make you believe.

Go compare the sizes of these three lenses, Nikon N1 New 10-100, DX18-200 and FX28-300 and report back... (All around 3.5-5.6)

Except they are not. 28-300 is, the other two are not.

SunnyFlordia is it you?

Ever see SunnyFlorida post an image here or have links to flickr and blog? Look me up, then report back.

-- hide signature --

Jason

Sorry miss SF, lol, not!

Sure they are around 3.5-5.6. They let the same amount of light hit the sensor.

10-100 = F4-5.6

18-200 = F3.5-5.6

28-300 = F3.5-5.6

I control the DoF based on sensor size, need shallow grab the D600 need huge DoF grab the V1. I get the difference...

Yes, you can do that, but in that case you don't have an equivalent lens, just a lens with equivalent FOV.

Can you PLEASE what "exactly" is an equivalent lens as regards to the sensor size?

You have answered that on your own...

From what I gather, the 10-100/F4-5.6 ( 1/2 sto difference which minor) is designed for the 1" Sensor (CX) which is equal to the 18-200/F3.5-56 on APS-C with a crop factor of 1.5 which is equal to 28-300/F3.5-5.6 FF format. All these lenses let the same amount of light for the front element of the lens to the surface of the sensor. The only thing that will be different (to me) is the DoF.

That's exactly it. Not only to you, but to everybody else. Those lenses are not equivalent, only equivalent to the half... or one third if you are generous, ignoring other, sensor and IQ related issues, like same ISO = more noise if the sensor is smaller.

The smaller the sensor the bigger the DoF, the bigger the sensor the shallower the DoF.

No. That's another misunderstanding. The shallower DOF comes from the aperture. Once you use equivalent aperture you will get an equivalent image with the same DOF and an equivalent ISO and ISO noise. Without an equivalent aperture everything is different except the AOV. The ISO will be equal, but NOT equivalent.

I got into the N1 (V1) Series because of the size and weight. I got the 2 lens kit (10-30 and 30-110) and replaced it with the 10-100. I have a 7Dk with the 28-200 and when I place them side by side, the 7DK looks huge compared to the V1. Both system are great for what they are. When traveling, I take my V1 instead of the much larger 7DK (in fact I will be selling it when I get to the U.S.). I don't expect to have same quality from the smaller sensor compared to a bigger one but there times when I get lucky on the 1" sensor that I can't tell the difference. I choose the 1 Series with all its limitations and I can live with that BUT the size and weight difference more than compensates for the rest.

Fine, but buy giving up the DX (I suppose you mean the D7k) you are giving up not only on the size, but also on other aspects, like the DOF and the better IQ. Of course, that is your own personal preference, but you can't really say that the two kits are equivalent.

This 70-300 (189-810 equivalent in FF / 105-450 in APS-C) will be a welcome to the N1 lens line up. Now 1 Series shooters don't have to use an adapter and and be limited. It will be much much smaller than any lens having the same equivalent FL.

Fine, but assuming the lens will be released (I would not hold my breath) it would be totally pointless, since if those fake "specs" we have seen before are true then it will be larger than the FX version of the 70-300 + FT1, and I suppose that the FX version is of higher quality.

I wish Nikon will come out with 24-70/F2.8 and 70-200/F2.8 FF equivalent for the 1 Series.

You can wish anything you like, but it will never happen. Those lenses would be far too expensive and the N1 users would not pay for those. Nikon knows that. Remember that 24-70/2.8 equivalent is 8.9-26/1 and the 70-200/2.8 equivalent is 25-74/1, as already explained many times, so those lenses would be huge and expensive, if they would be possible to make at all... Honestly, I don't think you would pay for them either, not even if you'd be happy with a partially equivalent lens, with the same aperture and only FOV equivalent. Talk is cheap, we have seen many examples on this forum when people claim one thing before a product is released and then once it is released they are "not interested" because of one or other invented excuses. That's also one reason camera manufacturers are not very interested in anonymous forum discussions and don't release products based on these comments.

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