EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
Sony did though, technically adding Cyan. Here's more on it from July 2003:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2003/7/15/sonyrgbeccd
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2003/7/15/sonyrgbeccd
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Will telephoto ever be viable on NEX?
- Thread starter IcyVeins
- Start date
Better link:
But this is off-topic. My point is that there can and will be major improvements in sensors (and bigger files).
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
Even more interesting to note is that even that tele-zoom lenses for even MFTs are big. In fact...
Panasonic 14-140mm OIS: 79mm x 90mm (for MFTs)
Sigma 18-250mm HSM OS: 74mm x 89mm (for DSLRs/SLT)
Panasonic 14-140mm OIS: 79mm x 90mm (for MFTs)
Sigma 18-250mm HSM OS: 74mm x 89mm (for DSLRs/SLT)
ProfHankD
Veteran Member
Well, not exactly. Cyan would have let more light pass, thus saturating pixels faster. "Emerald" is really cyan darkened just enough to balance with RGB pixel exposures.
BTW, I still use my F828 every now and then, mostly for NIR. Great camera.
probert500
Senior Member
Telephoto is a lens design that creates an artificial distance between the sensor and the virtual image. That's why a 400mm lens is not 400mm long when focussed at infinity. Many wide angle lenses are also telephoto in order to move the subject image AWAY from the sensor/film - see (olympus xa)
I bring this up not to be pedantic but because most of the arguments here are based on " can't they use optical tricks (design) to make telephotos smaller". "Telephoto" IS an optical design meant to (on long lenses) make the lens smaller.
As with everything there is a trade off: the more compact the lower the IQ. Moderm materials/manufacturing can help but those materials and techniques are used by everyone so relatively, it all stays the same on the IQ playing field.
I bring this up not to be pedantic but because most of the arguments here are based on " can't they use optical tricks (design) to make telephotos smaller". "Telephoto" IS an optical design meant to (on long lenses) make the lens smaller.
As with everything there is a trade off: the more compact the lower the IQ. Moderm materials/manufacturing can help but those materials and techniques are used by everyone so relatively, it all stays the same on the IQ playing field.
This wide angle design is called an Inverted Telephoto as it does the opposite of a normal telephoto - as you said, the lens is further away from the sensor rather than nearer. This makes room for a mirror, or helps with the shallow rays problem of the NEX-7.
Or at least, the more compact the more complicated and expensive the design.
Jabba23
Forum Enthusiast
Can I just ask what bag that is you have there.
--
Darren Krusi
--
Darren Krusi
AscherJim
Well-known member
I bought my NEX 5n ENTIRELY for use with legacy lenses, among which are prime and zoom telephotos. Jonathan's description of this usage and "feel' was precisely my intent and expectation in my purchase.Superb comparison
When using really big lenses my NEX practically disappears and I feel like you shoot with the lens rather than with the camera. It's more just a digital back, battery and handle
Nothing is obvious when talking about optics! It's all a bit confusing....rather to demonstrate something pretty obvious anyway
But the view is different, if the sensor size is different. And as we've been discussing in the other messages here, the larger sensor captures more light. But yeah, you can adapt a MF, FF or whatever lens to Nex and f/2.8 is f/2.8. And larger sensor still wins.now, in the neighboring thread there was a recent question abt. FL of
HB lens on NEX:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1042&message=41139214
with an obvious answer that e.g. 100mm FL lens taken from FF, or MF, or
a view-box camera will all be the same FL on 1.5x, and the only thing
that changes would be their flange distance (and hence different adapter
required to mount it properly). And as obviously - if shot in the above
conditions at f/2.8 - it would still require exactly the same 1/60 sec.
Equivalence or no equivalence,
--
Gary W.
probert500
Senior Member
"The corollary, I would expect the move to the larger sensors in the future as they get cheaper. You already see that with P&S and even phone cameras getting bigger sensors. There is no reason a large sensor can't be in a small camera body, there is no reason a large sensor wouldn't have the same pixel density as a small one. It's only a matter of cost which will inevitably go down."
We are on an NEX thread right? How small do you want stuff?
We are on an NEX thread right? How small do you want stuff?
hmm? maybe "obvious" is a wrong word - I really don't know,
because it gets obvious after one clears all hurdles, and then
it pretty impossible to force it to be "non-obvious" again in
one's mind;
although there are questions, which are maybe not as easy to
answer immediately - equivalence theorists usually stop at the
135-film form factor boundary (customarily referred to as FF), and
do not venture further - say, to answer a question: "what
would be the equivalence f-stop of the 80/2.8 legacy lens for
the 60x60mm film format if mounted on the APS-C sensor"??
jpr2
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~
because it gets obvious after one clears all hurdles, and then
it pretty impossible to force it to be "non-obvious" again in
one's mind
;although there are questions, which are maybe not as easy to
answer immediately - equivalence theorists usually stop at the
135-film form factor boundary (customarily referred to as FF), and
do not venture further - say, to answer a question: "what
would be the equivalence f-stop of the 80/2.8 legacy lens for
the 60x60mm film format if mounted on the APS-C sensor"??
jpr2
--Nothing is obvious when talking about optics! It's all a bit confusing....rather to demonstrate something pretty obvious anyway
But the view is different, if the sensor size is different. And as we've been discussing in the other messages here, the larger sensor captures more light. But yeah, you can adapt a MF, FF or whatever lens to Nex and f/2.8 is f/2.8. And larger sensor still wins.now, in the neighboring thread there was a recent question abt. FL of
HB lens on NEX:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1042&message=41139214
with an obvious answer that e.g. 100mm FL lens taken from FF, or MF, or
a view-box camera will all be the same FL on 1.5x, and the only thing
that changes would be their flange distance (and hence different adapter
required to mount it properly). And as obviously - if shot in the above
conditions at f/2.8 - it would still require exactly the same 1/60 sec.
Equivalence or no equivalence
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~
seachicken2000
Senior Member
Is this a trick question?
It's f/2.8 x 1.5 = f/4.2, the same as any other f/2.8 lens mounted on APS-C.
.. or am I missing something? Why would equivalence "theorists" stop short of answering this?
--
"The only thing that gets in the way of a really good photograph, is the camera"
Norman Parkinson
jpr2 wrote:
...
--
Gary W.
...
If you want to mount a MF lens to the Nex instead of an FF one, you can work out the equivalancy -- which is that it'll still be an 80/2.8, with a completely different FOV (much more narrow) than on an MF camera. Same concepts apply, larger sensor still better, etc.
--
Gary W.
captura
Forum Pro
Astrosandy wrote, "I have tried a different approach with my (previous) nex 3. I had bough a 500 mm Samyang mirror tele (branded as Walimex in Germany)."
I just acquired one of these. A special sharpening program produces good results.
Mine came with an m43 adapter so I tried it on the Oly with OK results. I'ts surprisingly lightweight and with the Olympus's built-in IBIS stabilization, the m43 may be the better way to go for long manual lenses. But the NEX has focus-peaking, OK if you're in a hurry.
I just acquired one of these. A special sharpening program produces good results.
Mine came with an m43 adapter so I tried it on the Oly with OK results. I'ts surprisingly lightweight and with the Olympus's built-in IBIS stabilization, the m43 may be the better way to go for long manual lenses. But the NEX has focus-peaking, OK if you're in a hurry.
davect01
Veteran Member
Another useless thread, great.
Seriously if you want to put it in your pocket get a compact zoom. You don't generally buy an interchangeable lens camera and still expect it to fit into your pocket.
As to the telephoto, the NEX is very doable but not perfect. I have a 70-210mm that works amazing and have no issues getting good pictures. I did have a 300mm and it worked great under good light, but darker situations started having issues.
Novice photobug, proud NEX-3 owner
http://davesnex-3photos.blogspot.com/
Seriously if you want to put it in your pocket get a compact zoom. You don't generally buy an interchangeable lens camera and still expect it to fit into your pocket.
As to the telephoto, the NEX is very doable but not perfect. I have a 70-210mm that works amazing and have no issues getting good pictures. I did have a 300mm and it worked great under good light, but darker situations started having issues.
--That is a great graphic, but which if these cameras will you be slipping into your jacket pocket? Knowing the answer to that, if you have to sling both of these around your neck, why not sling the one that has all the manual controls on it?Perceived?not in this Universe, unless... you're going to reinvent the laws of
physics
a myth... an urban legend if you prefer; and not only at the long FL
end = try to design a very bright UWA (or even WA), of say f/1.4
or larger, and I'll see how large it will be - optics and its laws again,
jpr2
--
And the camera to the left itself is the most compact APS-C DSLR/SLTs out there (Sony A55).
To me the NEX works when the 16/2.8 is on it, and when the industry comes out with a few more E-mount pancake lenses I'll definitely use mine more often, but until then, if you can't stick it in your pocket you give up more than you receive using a NEX compared to an Alpha.
Novice photobug, proud NEX-3 owner
http://davesnex-3photos.blogspot.com/
captura
Forum Pro
Putting a NEX in your pocket is a worthwhile topic if that's what you want to do. But this thread is about long lenses, right? So the pocket thing is redundant, here.
Actually, I think NEX could make telephoto lenses a lot skinnier. If only the stabilization system was in the body instead of the lens, the size of the lenses could be reduced remarkably. Example Olympus m43. And all the manual lenses would be stabilized as a side benefit.
Actually, I think NEX could make telephoto lenses a lot skinnier. If only the stabilization system was in the body instead of the lens, the size of the lenses could be reduced remarkably. Example Olympus m43. And all the manual lenses would be stabilized as a side benefit.
so far we have two replies, both different - anyone else wants
to be brave enough and venture theirs view
?
jpr2
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~
to be brave enough and venture theirs view
?jpr2
and:
--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~
Marvin Doering
Senior Member
Using telephotos on the NEX without IBIS is a pain in the backside.
--
MRD
--
MRD
nagi603
Forum Enthusiast
You are right in that it is a pain, but it is certainly doable. I just used that very tamron 70-300 USD for a Formula student race.... got some great shots handheld. Video is quite hopeless though.
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
Depends on whether one wants to re-use f-stop as t-stop, or considers f-stop as one defining DOF. 
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum