A reminder for some memebers as to what the F stop is all about.

Started Jan 26, 2014 | Discussions thread
philosomatographer
philosomatographer Contributing Member • Posts: 539
Re: Glad that you had such big aperture
1

RoelHendrickx wrote:

Glad that you had such big aperture.

Because the elephant would never have fitted in a smaller aperture.

No, seriously : that's an impressive shot.

Be glad that our 2x cropfactor allowed you to stay a bit further back.

Thanks, Roel!

My post was a little facetious I grant, luckily so was your reply (with "crop factor" and all...)

I certainly not only not feel limited by any equivalence argument, but I am liberated by the photographic opportunities I can take with the four thirds gear.

Sure, when I want very shallow depth of field with a normal view, I use my Summilux ASPH on my Leica rangefinder:

Cat and Lemon Trees

But when I want the ultimate in image quality and versatility insofar as lens performance is concerned, I reach for my E-5 and the SHG zooms.

Anybody still participating in the "equivalence" debate have a serious dead-horse-beating fetish - they should get out and take some photos, possibly with a "full-frame" system. Just remember to stop down those lenses to f/8 for a nice and even performance across the frame!

I use four thirds, 35mm "full-frame" (Leica), 6x7cm Medium Format (Mamiya), and 4x5in (Linhof) all on a regular basis. There are no optically better lenses than the Olympus SHGs when looking across all optical parameters.

Zeiss is the only manufacturer to have "caught on" with having to produce retrofocus, oversized lenses for ultimate performance on digital (the Otus 55/1.4). Manual focus, no weather sealing, single focal length, $3.5K

It'll be a while before somebody applies those ideas to an ultimate-performance f/4.0 (for "equivalence"), fast-focusing, fully weather-sealed zoom lens for 35mm sensors. Then we'll talk about cost and size, compared to the ZD 14-35mm f/2.0!

As it stands, we have junk like the Nikon 16-35mm f/4.0 that is not only huge like a telephoto lens, but distorts like a fisheye. See - only if they severely compromise on one parameter (distortion) do they manage a good showing with the others.

Truly uncompromising lenses are very rare in the 35mm world, yet we have them in the form of four zooms covering 7mm to 250mm in the four-thirds system. Of course, due to abandoned development, we are stuck with a "compromised" sensor, but such is life.

So - what were we debating in this thread again?

 philosomatographer's gear list:philosomatographer's gear list
Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200mm f/2G ED-IF VR Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
jnd
tko
tko
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow