Rejoice !!! Yet another equivalency thread :D Locked

Started Jan 31, 2014 | Discussions thread
All forumsForumParentFirstPrevious
This thread is locked.
goblin Veteran Member • Posts: 3,455
Rejoice !!! Yet another equivalency thread :D

The slow fading of the other threads about equivalency being a thorn in my natural thirst for knowledge, I can not feel but compelled to open a new one

So here it is:

Apples for apples, and excepting out of the ordinary products (such as shg f2 zooms)

- Would a 24mm 1.8 4/3 lens be as easy / inexpensive to build as a FF 50mm 1.8 lens (given both are the quasi "Standard" focal for their respective sensor size ?)

- Or, at the contrary should it be considered as "25mm is 25mm", hence the 25mm 1.8 4/3 lens would follow the optical configuration and technical solutions applied on a FF 25mm lens ?

- Or, if the comparison in sensor coverage between FF and 4/3 plays too much in the equation and flaws it - STAYING WITHIN THE 4/3 STANDARD - would a 4/3 25mm lens be still more expensive to conceive / build than a 4/3 50mm lens ?

Basically - would the rule "50mm lenses are the least expensive and simpler to build" work across the board (not depending on sensor coverage), or will it have to be adjusted for equivalency ?

 goblin's gear list:goblin's gear list
Ricoh GXR P10 28-300mm F3.5-5.6 VC Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp2 Quattro +73 more
All forumsForumParentFirstPrevious
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow