30 new lenses added in one go to the m4/3 system...

Started Dec 23, 2012 | Discussions thread
Rriley
Rriley Forum Pro • Posts: 21,846
Re: 30 new lenses added in one go to the m4/3 system...

amalric wrote:

I am not so sure that a device limited to a camera only would boost the sales of 4/3 lenses.

Ive been wondering what they would do if a particular 43rds lens had an unavailable status, besides theres plenty of scope for me to be wrong as it stands

Moreover a proprietary device wouldn't be much welcome here.

I do agree with an earlier answer that 4/3 lenses being telecentric have better performance at the edges, that is why I keep the 'old' 9-18. Probably CDAF compatible 4/3 lenses can be made to move faster with a faster sampling rate anyway.

well it always seems like cameras are continually underfunded with computing speed and RAM, however

Without using the phasing principle that has already been used elsewhere, the issue entire is that pre-movement cdAF only has one data set to work with. Being that moving the lens focus mechanism is going to be slower than using actuators. Introducing another data set at a staged distance from the first requires another physical interruption of some kind.I can think of 4 ways that can occur.

1) Im not confident it could be done with a retractable lens, but a simple clear retractable flat glass would work as it would increase the physical distance of the optical path as long as the interrupter is in the light path by virtue of its refractive index profile. This then allows the static position contrast sample and a longer focus sample. Either a linear drive or a rotary type mechanism could be utilised, but rotary would have to be able to reference in between video frames, the latter having full time pdAF during video.

2) In hunting other patents it has been noticed they have been looking at a group of different FL microlenses, each creating one of 3 focussing positions. I guess that assumes that they have 3x the AF pixels. This already seems problematical with one set, 3x might be a burden

3/4) The only other way is to alter the distance relationship between the sensor and the lens, which the previous patent I presented attempts to do, and what my 'wobble' proposal sought to do. Moving to another distance relationship establishes another data set from which the variance in contrast can be analysed and plotted, determining where a lens is to travel to assume focus thus speeding its course.

2ii) The issue with microlenses is, the minuteness of such a design and its inclusion into the sensor assembly chain, more especially if you are not a sensor manufacturer. The wiring of same doesnt present any unusual problem.

3/4ii) The issue with physical movements is in being able to confidently restore the intended focus position at exactly the right register. And herein you have flexible electrical connections to consider, b/se they will have a limited cycle life. I can only guess that this makes movement at the mount a better proposition than at the sensor, but then, they have an established track record of reliability with other sensor movements involved with IS, which would seem not too dissimilar.

As for the NEX FF project, it will be interesting to see how the solve the bad edges problem and the colour bleeding, so again m4/3 will still thrive - if its resolution across the frame is competitive.

they have the resources to improve microlenses, whether or not that is enough remains to be seen

Always good to know that investment is not going to the dogs

Am.

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

Riley
any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'

 Rriley's gear list:Rriley's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Olympus E-3 Olympus E-5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow