Lens costs.

Started Apr 6, 2012 | Discussions thread
Flat view
Louis_Dobson Forum Pro • Posts: 27,361
Lens costs.

Two things largely define the cost of lenses, the size of the entry aperture, and the fancy glass used.

MFT lenses do NOT cost as much to make as FF lenses.

The size of the hole at the front of a lens is not about the f number, the f number is mathematical construct, the hole, or entry pupil, is A, where A=fl/f. This is also the basis of the equivalence thing, and yes folks it really is true that a 50mm f2 lens n MFT behave like a 100mm f4 lens on FF, and it tends to cost much the same too, because A in both cases is 25mm.

So that's the first pile of cobblers sorted. If Panny were charging the same for a 12-35 f2.8 as Canikon charge for a 24-70 f2.8 FF they would indeed be ripping you off.

Second pile - a 24-70VR f2.8 full of ED glass would not be £1,000. So the Panny lenses are NOT the same price. They are cheaper, as they should be.

Third pile - cheap f4 zooms from other companies are second line zooms, so they have cheap, compromised designs and perform less well. So you should not compare a top of the line MFT f2.8 zoom to those either .

Conclusion: the MFT f2.8 zooms will cost less than Canikon f2.8 zooms because they have smaller elements, but more than the slower zooms to which they are more "equivalent" because they will use better glass and perform better.

 Louis_Dobson's gear list:Louis_Dobson's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow