Why not a 12-35 F1.8 - F2.8?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Sergey_Green
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,876Gear list
Like?
I am quite surprised you never heard of it
In reply to CharlesB58, 5 months ago

CharlesB58 wrote:

hdkhang wrote:

If you read back at posts made by some of the experts who frequent dpreview you would know that the SHG 14-35 f/2 and 35-100 f/2 lenses are in fact full frame 28-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 designs with a speed booster (wide angle converter) built in. This explains why it is larger and heavier than the full frame equivalents. The size and weight are not due to being built to a higher quality standard - there is no evidence to suggest that they are any better built than the Nikon/Canon etc. f/2.8 zooms.

The speed booster would have allowed Oly to make those lenses f/1.4 zooms but Oly decided to play it safe and limit the lenses to f/4 (which results in f/2 once boosted). This helps send the message of "sharp wide open" when wide open is actually already stopped down by one stop.

If Oly wanted to make a smaller 14-35 f/2 or 30-100 f/2 they would have started with full frame f/4 designs and boosted them one stop instead.

Never heard of this before.

There have been several discussions on the open talk about it.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/33205403

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/33837996

Also, depending on the "experts" I would take such an assessment with a large grain of salt,

Joseph Wisniewski was involved in designs of several lenses throughout his career.

especially since I haven't seen any such assessment from labs that have actually tested the lenses.

Labs test how lenses perform, not how and where the designs originate from.

Not saying this isn't the case, but I have learned to be skeptical of certain "experts" on DPR forums.

I think the better answer from you would have been that you do not have enough interest in the subject, or otherwise you could have simply looked it up yourself.

I think what we are looking at is a semantics difference or misunderstanding of what a "telecentric" design actually is, perhaps?

Most explanations regarding the size of these 2 lenses revolve around the telecentric design being used to increase edge to edge sharpness and performance wide open.

Here you go,

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/37045026

For example,

35-100mm f/2.0

Equivalent FF Nikon 70-200 f/4, at long end (as an example).

So how is it looking? And guess what, even though it is also built to the highest standards, it is also smaller and lighter.

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
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