I think the notion of FF = heavier lens may not be true

Started Nov 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
CharlesB58 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,734
Re: I think the notion of FF = heavier lens may not be true

shigzeo ? wrote:

nicholo89 wrote:

I know I might get some flak for this, but I was just curious about this debate so decided to check out the olympus site.

I know it's not FF, but if the logic is that bigger sensors mean bigger lenses, then it should also be concluded that aps-c lenses will be bigger/heavier than m43.

But after checking the olympus site, their equivalent lenses are heavier. They don't have exact same focal lengths but relatively close.

zuiko 14-54 2.8-3.5 = 440g

fuji 18-55 2.8-4 = 310

zuiko 50-200 2.8-3.5 = 995g

fuji 55-200 2.8-4 = 580g

for comparison, panasonic's closest was the 45-150, but with a slow aperture of 4-5.6 weight = 200g. It's much lighter than both the zuiko and fuji, but has a slower max aperture.

zuiko 35 f3.5 = 165g

fuji 35 1.4 = 187g

panasonic 45 2.8 = 225g

panasonic 25 1.4 = 200g

I know some may not be a direct comparison, but some of them just don't make the same focal length and aperture. What I find interesting is that Fuji is actually the lightest of the bunch, but has a bigger sensor.

It seems to really all boil down to lens design and materials. I think the assumption is also that all else being equal, yes, it glass elements will be bigger to accommodate a larger sensor, but the lens as a whole can still be light by using lighter metals like aluminum and perhaps less glass elements.

-- hide signature --

Not to mention the tiny sum micron-C lenses, tiny elmarits, etc., full frame is only huge once you get internal focus SLR systems between them. The SLRs and 'full frame' of yesterday had lot of small equipment associated.

You are missing a few aspects of comparison. The Olympus 14-54 and 50-200 are older designs, HG lenses that have a more robust build, weather sealing and more complex optical construction than the Fuji lenses. Not all lenses o a given focal length/aperture range are equal. Materials used, construction tolerances and even the basic optical formula all can add weight and bulk to a lens.

Consider the Olympus 12-40 f2.8, the Panasonic 12-35 and 35-100 f2.8 and other m4/3 lenses to the Fuji APS-C lenses. Much better comparison when talking about current lenses for both systems.

Not to mention that comparing aps-c lenses, instead of the FF you mention in your subject, is a  non-sequiter .

-- hide signature --

If, in my lifetime, I will have produced just one image that makes a real difference in the life of another, I will have achieved my highest goal as a photographer.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow