Is Full frame still the most versatile?

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Discussions thread Forum Pro • Posts: 12,755
Re: Is Full frame still the most versatile?

plevyadophy wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

plevyadophy wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

plevyadophy wrote:

zenpmd wrote:

plevyadophy - what do you mean by distortion at 12mm on m43?

It's not distortion at 12mm on mFT per se, rather it's 12mm distortion (no matter what format). At that extreme focal length barrel distortion is common (mFT hides it by automatically doing distortion correction, at the risk of some image quality loss in the corners, on JPEG output). To get rid of it optically, means a more expensive and complex lens.

This is wrong. You can deduce that this is wrong through the use of reductio ad absurdem. If it were the case, then compacts and phones with tiny lenses would have insane distortion. They don't.

Dear oh dear, what's with all that pretentious Latin nonsense?

I suggest you go take a look at review sites like this one, SLR Gear, Lenstip, Photozone, Diglloyd and others. I think you will find that it is the wider angle lenses that have the most barrel distortion and the wider the lens the more distortion. And the manufacturer has three choices: leave the distortion uncorrected, attempt to correct it optically, or attempt to correct it by software; in fact one could add a fourth option which is to correct it as best as one can optically, allowing for things such as cost and then to attempt to complete the correction by way of software correction.

The microFT system does the bulk of it's lens correction in software for most of the lenses in the system. Get yourself a raw file from any microFT camera and have a look at it in a software package that doesn't auto-correct distortion. Or if you are lazy, or haven't got the time because you are studying Latin, go over to the Photozone site because the reviewer there often shows the difference between the corrected and non-corrected raw files.

When you have perused all the evidence, please do enlighten me as to what it all means in Latin.

No need. It's wrong in any language.

A 12mm lens for 4/3s or m4/2s will have around the same distortion as a 24mm FF lens. It won't have the same distortion as a 12mm FF lens.

The software correction allows for more flexible lens design.

As I said, take that logic and run with it. There's compact cameras out there with focal lengths of just 4.7mm for an FF equivalent of 24mm. They don't have any more of an issue with distortion than the larger formats. The reason for this is that the entire image pipeline is shrunk. Not just the focal length.


A 12mm lens is a 12mm lens on ANY format. The focal length and it's characteristics don't suddenly change just because of the sensor sitting behind it. Yeah, the field of view changes based on the sensor sitting behind the lens but susceptibility to certain aberrations doesn't. Oh dear me. Perhaps studying the classics is more your forte than studying evidence.

Perhaps, you may care to speak to some architectural photographers and ask them which of their lenses tend to show more barrel distortion, the wides or the normals.

Stop theorising, and go look at the evidence and then come back and tell me your findings in Latin.

Similar distortion - even though one is a 12mm, the other a 24mm.

Now, care to explain why distortion isn't a significant issue on a Pana LX7, with its 4.7mm lens for 24mm FF?'s gear's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Biggs23
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
MOD Biggs23
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow