Reading mode: Light Dark

Did anyone know that the "Kit" DC lenses that come with the SD10...

Go to last post
Given that Canon may be using plastic lens elements, it's possible that Sigma, Nikon, Konica-Minolta, Olympus, etc. are also. These lenses fit into the lens offerings from a company and many people don't see the need to spend the extra money on high quality lenses.

Also, there's nothing wrong with using plastic in optics. Eye glasses now use plastic lenses with a higher refractive index to make them thinner and lighter than glass lenses. Same can hold true for the optics in camera lenses.

Finally, from what I had read, many people were pleasantly surprised about the quality of the Canon kit lens for the dRebel. From the little that I used the kit lenses for the SD10, I thought they were pretty good, too. But, I knew Sigma had better, so I upgraded to the EX series.
Tamlin1578 said:
Now, I'm not saying that the DC elements aren't acrylic, but
regardless, this particular snippet doesn't seem to have anything
to do with the original post.

And ya, the Helios44 M42 lenses are a LOT sharper, but I've gotten
some great shots with both my DC's, and each is handy if I just
want to take along one lens to catch quick shots. Besides, that
pair of lenses is what enabled me to afford the jump into dSLR's in
the first place, so I'm certainly not going to throw stones. :g:

-Jake
JPSabo said:
http://www.camerahacker.com/Canon/18-55mm.shtml

"Now that I have told you what is extraordinary about this lens,
it's time for me to cover some other things that I'm sure you are
interested in. For one, I alluded to its small and lightweight
construction. The lens is made out of plastic. Everything,
including the lens-mount and possibly even the lens elements are
made out of plastic. The plastic material is the main reason to why
the lens is so light. It is also extremely compact. Canon has
attributed its compactness to the short-back focus (EF-S)
technology. You can read more about this technology in the Canon
Technical Report (see "Related Links" below). "
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
John P. Sabo
[email protected]

'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.'
  • Arthur C. Clarke -
 
Here's another finding from 45 seconds of extensive research:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm
quote:

Another clever way is to glue a thin molded piece of aspherical plastic to a conventional glass element. This gives the advantage of adding mechanical stability to the plastic element since it's glued to a glass substrate. This is also inexpensive and allows some performance improvement at the same time. Nikon uses this in the 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D, 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D and 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-D. The 28-200 also uses molded aspherical elements.
endquote

j
JPSabo said:
"Now that I have told you what is extraordinary about this lens,
it's time for me to cover some other things that I'm sure you are
interested in. For one, I alluded to its small and lightweight
construction. The lens is made out of plastic. Everything,
including the lens-mount and possibly even the lens elements are
made out of plastic. The plastic material is the main reason to why
the lens is so light. It is also extremely compact. Canon has
attributed its compactness to the short-back focus (EF-S)
technology. You can read more about this technology in the Canon
Technical Report (see "Related Links" below). "
dehlers said:
ARE ACRYLIC! Yeh, I learned that the Main inner lense "glass" on
these DC lenses are Acrylic. I felt violated. I now have EX 24-60
F2.8 and EX 70-200 F2.8 "My Kit" lenses, and yes all of my pictures
are sharper and cleaner! It's amazing what real glass can do for
you.
Click to expand...
--
John P. Sabo
[email protected]

'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
magic.'
  • Arthur C. Clarke -
Click to expand...
 
Yup...that's what I use...

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/lens_making.asp

"Another type of lens element used in lenses is the result of a technology developed by several companies called Hybrid Aspherics. This is a compound method of bonding glass and resin materials to produce a lens element with a non-spherical surface. The formation of the aspherical surface onto the completed element is accomplished through the centering process."

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/p/ph/photographic_lens.htm

"The lens elements are made of a transparent material. (A brittle transparent solid with irregular atomic structure) Glass is the most popular, except for the lenses in the least-expensive cameras. Various plastics can substitute for glass, with (Click link for more info and facts about acrylic (or PMMA)) acrylic (or PMMA), the material of Plexiglas, being one possibility. This is easier than glass to form into special shapes, such as surfaces that are not spherical, that have advantageous optical properties. However, it scratches easily, so glass is preferable for the outermost elements (which require occasional cleaning). For aspherical elements, plastics are common even in expensive photographic optics, although manufacturers often conceal this by substituting terms such as "optical resin.""
Just Looking said:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm
quote:
Another clever way is to glue a thin molded piece of aspherical
plastic to a conventional glass element. This gives the advantage
of adding mechanical stability to the plastic element since it's
glued to a glass substrate. This is also inexpensive and allows
some performance improvement at the same time. Nikon uses this in
the 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D, 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D and 28-200mm
f/3.5-5.6 AF-D. The 28-200 also uses molded aspherical elements.
endquote

j
JPSabo said:
"Now that I have told you what is extraordinary about this lens,
it's time for me to cover some other things that I'm sure you are
interested in. For one, I alluded to its small and lightweight
construction. The lens is made out of plastic. Everything,
including the lens-mount and possibly even the lens elements are
made out of plastic. The plastic material is the main reason to why
the lens is so light. It is also extremely compact. Canon has
attributed its compactness to the short-back focus (EF-S)
technology. You can read more about this technology in the Canon
Technical Report (see "Related Links" below). "
dehlers said:
ARE ACRYLIC! Yeh, I learned that the Main inner lense "glass" on
these DC lenses are Acrylic. I felt violated. I now have EX 24-60
F2.8 and EX 70-200 F2.8 "My Kit" lenses, and yes all of my pictures
are sharper and cleaner! It's amazing what real glass can do for
you.
Click to expand...
--
John P. Sabo
[email protected]

'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
magic.'
  • Arthur C. Clarke -
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
John P. Sabo
[email protected]

'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.'
  • Arthur C. Clarke -
 
I checked every inch of the street and only found tiny glass fragments.

All the other parts I collected in a jar.

If it was acrylic, it would be well scratched up but in one piece.

But don't conclude from this, maybe I didn't look hard enough or a lense recycler happended to walk by before I could get to it.
Chunsum J Choi said:
didn't you break on of those kit lens(18-50)?? you got the parts?

--
Chunsum.

http://www.chunsum.com (finally, it's back!)
http://www.pbase.com/chunsum
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9
http://www.foveonx3.org
Click to expand...
--
website: http://www.jason-page.com
portfolio: http://www.pbase.com/jasonpage
Most Recent: http://www.pbase.com/jasonpage/root&view=recent
try http://www.jason-page.com/foveon.html for now.

The legendary man behind Foveon:

'Listen to the technology; find out what it's telling you.' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carver_Mead ']Carver Mead[ url]
email: page.jason @ gmail.com
 
I try my best to respect other people's post by reading them first and not doing skims. This is the same thing that happend to my sensor cleaning recommendation. But I won't go into a pi** fight about that. I avoided it by just giving in.

Please make sure you read a post before you reply to it.
dehlers said:
Ceramic and Acrylic are two different things.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

--
website: http://www.jason-page.com
portfolio: http://www.pbase.com/jasonpage
Most Recent: http://www.pbase.com/jasonpage/root&view=recent
try http://www.jason-page.com/foveon.html for now.

The legendary man behind Foveon:

'Listen to the technology; find out what it's telling you.' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carver_Mead ']Carver Mead[ url]
email: page.jason @ gmail.com
 
dehlers said:
Do you think light passes through plastic as efficiently as it
passes through glass?
Click to expand...
No, but that's basically irrelivant. The lenses you're talking about are hybrid aspherics. They're spherical glass lenses with a thermosetting (not thermoplastic) resin coat that is only thick enough to impose an aspherical contour to the element. The resin thickness is comparable to the thickness of the optical cement used for decades in cemented lens elements.
dehlers said:
Yes I understand the whole freedom of design
thing. But, with all the half-ass reviewers out there who throw
the SD10 under the bus, I don't think the DC lenses should be
within 50 yards of the camera when it's being reviewed. They do not
represent the true quality of the SD10.
Click to expand...
It's not the "DC" issue, or the hybrid aspheric issue, but the "zooms pushed too far" issue, and it affects all reviews. I've seen Nikons and Canons reviewed with "kit zooms", too.

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
dehlers said:
ARE ACRYLIC! Yeh, I learned that the Main inner lense "glass" on
these DC lenses are Acrylic. I felt violated. I now have EX 24-60
F2.8 and EX 70-200 F2.8 "My Kit" lenses, and yes all of my pictures
are sharper and cleaner! It's amazing what real glass can do for
you.
Click to expand...
Is it now? Your 24-60mm EX has three of those Acrylic elements.

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/lens/standardzoom/24_60_28.htm

The 18-50 kit lens you're whining about only has one Acrylic element.

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/lens/digital/18_50_35_56.htm

So enjoy your "real glass" lens, with three times as much Acrylic as the "kit lens".

(Or, read up on "hybrid aspherics" as others have told you to do, and learn why the Acrylic is actually good for you)

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Just Looking said:
Here's another finding from 45 seconds of extensive research:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm
quote:
Another clever way is to glue a thin molded piece of aspherical
plastic to a conventional glass element. This gives the advantage
of adding mechanical stability to the plastic element since it's
glued to a glass substrate. This is also inexpensive and allows
some performance improvement at the same time. Nikon uses this in
the 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D, 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D and 28-200mm
f/3.5-5.6 AF-D. The 28-200 also uses molded aspherical elements.
endquote
Click to expand...
The Sigma site is pretty cool, too. Only took a minute to find out that deheler's 24-60mm f2.8 EX has three of those "Acrylic" hybrid aspherics, while the kit lens he rants about only has one ;)

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
dehlers said:
Ceramic and Acrylic are two different things. Most cheap Sunglass
lenses are acrylic. Ceramic wont melt under high heat, acrylic is
fancy for "plastic." Now that I thought of it, the plastic cups in
my cupboard are acrylic.
Click to expand...
Well, what's your definition of "high heat"?

The softening temperature, above which it will pernamently deform under its own weight, is 115 degrees C (239 degrees F).

The heat deflection temperature, above which it will permantly deform if subjected to considerable pressure, is 105 degrees C (221 degrees F). Below this temperature, the acrylic will not deform, no matter how long you leave it under pressure.

As hybrid aspheric lenses are acrylic coatings over glass lenses, the acrylic isn't under pressure when the lens elements are mounted, so the 117 deg C limit is more appropriate for this discussion, but we'll use the 105 deg C limit, just to reduce whining.

105 deg C (239 deg F) is very hot, above the boiling point of water. At that temperature, you've got bigger worries than the acrylic. By that point, the glass elements in your lenses are coming uncemented, the flex circuit boards in your camera and lenses are dying, the focusing screen in your camera is already gone.

And, if you pick up your camera or lens, you've just bought yourself a ticket for an ambulance ride to the burn ward of the nearest hospital.

That is, provided your lithium-ion batteries don't explode or catch fire. 105 deg C is far outside their safe storage range, let alone their operating range.

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Mr. McGuire: I just want to say one word to you - just one word.

Ben: Yes sir.

Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?

Ben: Yes I am.

Mr. McGuire: 'Plastics.'

Ben: Exactly how do you mean?

Mr. McGuire: There's a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it?

Ben: Yes I will.

Mr. McGuire: Shh! Enough said. That's a deal.

The Graduate (1967)

http://www.filmsite.org/grad.html
Joseph S. Wisniewski said:
onemintyulep said:
So what?
Click to expand...
But acrylic isn't suitable for a camera lens. Never mind that it's
used in yoru glasses.

Or in contact lenses.

Or in lens replacements for cataract surgery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymethyl_methacrylate

Acrylic can't possibly be used for photographic lenses...

--
Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post
something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
Click to expand...
--
John P. Sabo
[email protected]

'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.'
  • Arthur C. Clarke -
 
very funny! lol

--
Unlock your photographic potential !

 
Just the Robinson's affair.

You shoudn't be blabbing that stuff in public.

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
"Acrylic" is also known as Plexiglass in the USA and Perspex in the UK and is (poly)methylmethacrylate.

It is a great deal more efficient at transmitting light than glass - if you look at the edge of a sheet of glass, it will appear green (mostly due to iron impurities) whereas a sheet of Perspex will appear water clear. This is one of the reasons why Perspex is used for 'light pipes' and optical fibres. Its refractive index (ability to bend, and hence focus, light) is less than that of glass, and much less than some of the modern rare-earth doped glasses used in lens construction.

All pretty much irrelevant really, except that it points to fear of new materials: remember the complaints about 'plastic cameras' when the widespread use of metal died out for bodies - ignoring the fact that they were much tougher, more impact resistant and could be shaped in to more intersting and ergonomic bodies.

What matters is the quaility of the lens - and it doesn't matter what it's made of as long as the plastic elements (which scratch more easily) are not exposed - and, (at risk of flames!), if it's good enough for Nikon, it's good enough for anyone!

Best wishes,

Alan J
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BillyBobSenna
Not Missing F2.8 Glass
2 3
Replies
47
Views
567
Jerry_P_M
J
A
  • For sale For sale
Lots of SIGMA cameras and lenses and a few other items for sale
Replies
1
Views
188
PLShooter
P
Pennyfan
Sigma 17–40mm f1.8 DC ART for Fujifilm (Feat Test Chart vs XF1655 Gen1)
Replies
6
Views
2K
1000DTL
1
Pennyfan
  • User review User review
Sigma 17–40mm f1.8 DC ART for Fujifilm (Feat Test Chart vs XF1655 Gen1)
Replies
1
Views
1K
Winterfrost
Winterfrost
N
Suggestions Needed - Z7ii Lenses
Replies
5
Views
6
monte12345
M

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top