waldershelf
Member
No it doesn't 36x24 is 135 format
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
When DSLRs go full frame, will todays digi lenses be obsolete?
- Thread starter taffy jon
- Start date
waldershelf
Member
Cannon just hi-jacked the term
waldershelf
Member
Not to me it doesnt, it means 35x24mm
Tony Hall
Veteran Member
Your post makes no sense. If you're willing to buy an R1, then why are you so worried about FF compatibility? If you bought a FF, you'd be selling your R1 just like you'd be selling your D50 and lens.
Besides, with Ebay, there are no "bad investments". If you want to change gear, you just sell your current gear.
--
Website: http://www.tonyhall.name
Shooting with a Sony R1 and loving it.
Tony
Besides, with Ebay, there are no "bad investments". If you want to change gear, you just sell your current gear.
--
Website: http://www.tonyhall.name
Shooting with a Sony R1 and loving it.
Tony
eta
Well-known member
That's not the closest, you loudly misinformed photographer. That's the meaming of FF. The lenses are designed for this particular frame of 36 X24 mm
Once again you are missinformed or just playing flat.
When you frame (verb) is completly different than frame (noun). The frame (noun) is 36 x24 mm that the lenses were desined to work on.
With "crop" camera you CANNOT frame(verb) what the lens was designed to frame. So, you cannot say ful frame is what YOU frame.
IF, you use, on the other hand, especially designed lens for 15 x 8 mm sensor or film for example, then you have the ful frame sistem again
Emil
A lens is designed to resolve the subject of the photographers vision. The lens in question does a poorer job of capturing the edges then the "normal," and supposedly "inferior lens."
In other words when I frame an image, I am using the entire sensor without losing the edges.
What pray tell would you say if I actually designed a lens in the knowledge that the edges would be soft - so I design a lens so that the entire captured image is resolved at the maximum potential? Also known as the "Sweet spot?"
So you are in effect saying that the arbitray destinction here is a meaningful term.
When I view a subject, and frame it. I record the "Full Frame."
If I wish to record a wider or smaller angle, I use the appropriate lens.
I have no problem, for the purposes of clarity in conversation using this meaningless expression...
Let me sum up. What if a lens company, knowing the problem with the design of optics DELIBERATLY creates a lens that focuses on an area larger then the sensor? Doing this for the purpose of creating a larger "sweet spot?"
If we still lived in a film environment, this would be hailed an an innovative and creative approach.
Isn't this all a lot of whooey?
As for playing - Go play with your full frame camera, and I will play with MY full frame camera. Both cameras capture what you frame.
Dave
eta
Well-known member
LOL!
For clarity you stop smoking the funny grass
, or send some to me so all that conversation becomes somewhat meaningfull to both of us. Until then have a nice day,
Emil
sugar208304
Veteran Member
and trust me, I have to buy my first lens that actually gets myself dividends. You spend money on camera gear, you don't invest it...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I can crop at the long end myself if I want to
There's no substitute for mm²
some humble pictures : http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259727@N00/
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I can crop at the long end myself if I want to
There's no substitute for mm²
some humble pictures : http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259727@N00/
, but don't waste time arguing about it. The expression fullframe relating to 36mmx24mm sensor isn't going anywhere because you don't agree with it.
I put it in the same category as the term "point and shoot".
--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root
I put it in the same category as the term "point and shoot".
--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root
Hennie de Ruyter
Leading Member
As long as point and shoot is cheaper than APS it will sell to the vast majority.
As long as APS is cheaper than FF it will sell to amateur photographers wanting more than P+S but with a limited budget.
Everyone (well most) accept that BMW cars are more desirable than Toyota Corollas but there are more Toyota Corollas on the road. Camera makers has to obey the same economic realities than car makers.
The increased telephoto capability and the cheaper glass required for APS will ensure it's existance. Sensors might one day be so cheap that FF that cost will cease to be a major factor. Good quality lenses will not drop in price likewise. I believe that many more EFS type lenses will be manufactured due to the definite cost and weight advantage over FF lenses.
As long as APS is cheaper than FF it will sell to amateur photographers wanting more than P+S but with a limited budget.
Everyone (well most) accept that BMW cars are more desirable than Toyota Corollas but there are more Toyota Corollas on the road. Camera makers has to obey the same economic realities than car makers.
The increased telephoto capability and the cheaper glass required for APS will ensure it's existance. Sensors might one day be so cheap that FF that cost will cease to be a major factor. Good quality lenses will not drop in price likewise. I believe that many more EFS type lenses will be manufactured due to the definite cost and weight advantage over FF lenses.
Calico Cat
Veteran Member
Ha ha, that's 100% correct.
Even if sensors in EVERY sizes would fall from the sky, and the government would pay for cleaning the streets for sensors, most people would still not go FF. Sensor cost is only one aspect, which eventually will become less and less important in the future. Lens size, weight, speed, bulk, and cost are in favour of smaller sensors. Most people don't print larger than 8x10", at least not very often. The new LMOS 7.5 mp 4/3 sensor offers plenty of resolution and acceptable iso 1600 performance for most people even TODAY. In 10 years the same performance could come from 2/3 sensors, maybe even sooner.
If anything, the sensors will become smaller in the future, and FF will be the niche of the pros and the perfectionists.
--
http://iciclelanding.com/aperture?photo=17863&size=0&view=image&bogus
If anything, the sensors will become smaller in the future, and FF will be the niche of the pros and the perfectionists.
--
http://iciclelanding.com/aperture?photo=17863&size=0&view=image&bogus
I agree that the Fundamentalists are clearly feeling threatened by the "attack" on this meaningless term. Why they are almost Biblical in their insistance that there is ONLY one full frame, as opposed to the heathen who worship other full frames.
But I don't see this size sensor becoming the home of the rich and the professional. The rich of course can purchase any toy they want, and if they hear that there are religious reasons for one-upmanship, they might get camera's with this sensor - But professionals are neither against or for this sensor.
They simply want the full frame of thier image to have a high quality, and couldn't give a fig for the actual sensor size. The technological future will render this entire discussion an embarrasment to the religous minded...
They will have to find other gods to worship
Dave
taffy,
Unless you stay with one camera brand, your 35mm full frame lenses will not fit on other brands, correct?
The 4/3 System seems promising in that it allows you to interchange camera bodies and lenses that are compatible with the 4/3 System. Leica has thrown in its weight behind the 4/3 System and I can see more and more "newer" digital camera manufacturers eventually joining -- or maybe not. The future is hard to predict.
Personally, I wouldn't worry too much about it and purchase only what I need now. This digital technology is changing so fast that, as most posters are trying to say, it is really difficult to know for sure which way the wind will be blowing tomorrow, and so we should not be adamantly judging everything new by some established but changing standards (does that sentence make any sense?).
Yin
editor, Photoxels.com
Unless you stay with one camera brand, your 35mm full frame lenses will not fit on other brands, correct?
The 4/3 System seems promising in that it allows you to interchange camera bodies and lenses that are compatible with the 4/3 System. Leica has thrown in its weight behind the 4/3 System and I can see more and more "newer" digital camera manufacturers eventually joining -- or maybe not. The future is hard to predict.
Personally, I wouldn't worry too much about it and purchase only what I need now. This digital technology is changing so fast that, as most posters are trying to say, it is really difficult to know for sure which way the wind will be blowing tomorrow, and so we should not be adamantly judging everything new by some established but changing standards (does that sentence make any sense?).
Yin
editor, Photoxels.com
ScottyNV
Veteran Member
TJ,
why do you think that ALL DSLR's are going to go FF/35 in the near future? with the latest APS-C lens (EF 17-55/2.8), Canon has given an indication that they will keep that sensor size around for a good long while for the enthusiast amateur and 'new pro' markets..
Nikon has shown (so far) no inclination to go for FF/35 or that they are even working on such a sensor..
both of these things tell me that APS-xx will be around for at least 10 or more years.. probably a lot longer!
Cheers,
S.
--
why do you think that ALL DSLR's are going to go FF/35 in the near future? with the latest APS-C lens (EF 17-55/2.8), Canon has given an indication that they will keep that sensor size around for a good long while for the enthusiast amateur and 'new pro' markets..
Nikon has shown (so far) no inclination to go for FF/35 or that they are even working on such a sensor..
both of these things tell me that APS-xx will be around for at least 10 or more years.. probably a lot longer!
Cheers,
S.
--
- How deep does the Rabbit Hole go? *
Edgar Lydias
Active member
Photography has never experienced such an ease to do so.
Edgar.
Edgar.
i.e.
"Canon has given an indication that they will keep that sensor size around for a good long while for the enthusiast amateur and 'new pro' markets"
...the (REAL) reason being that some of their lenses perform appallingly on a FF sensor... so it will take time for Canon to replace all of their legacy film lenses with digital equivalents.
.. but at least they have made a start ... with the new version of the (expensive) 85mm f1.2L ..... a lens that depending on the day of the week it was manufactured (there are plenty of 'Friday afternoon specials' out there) it was hit or miss whether this lens focussed properly on an EOS 20D body. A unique example of a combination of a fantastic lens and a fantastic dslr body frequently producing less-than disposable-camera-quality images.
"Canon has given an indication that they will keep that sensor size around for a good long while for the enthusiast amateur and 'new pro' markets"
...the (REAL) reason being that some of their lenses perform appallingly on a FF sensor... so it will take time for Canon to replace all of their legacy film lenses with digital equivalents.
.. but at least they have made a start ... with the new version of the (expensive) 85mm f1.2L ..... a lens that depending on the day of the week it was manufactured (there are plenty of 'Friday afternoon specials' out there) it was hit or miss whether this lens focussed properly on an EOS 20D body. A unique example of a combination of a fantastic lens and a fantastic dslr body frequently producing less-than disposable-camera-quality images.
Except that most of the lenses don't preform any (much) worse on FF sensors than they did on FF film, not that most of the namby pamby APS-C crowd would know that.
The 28/1.8 could use an update though; that thing's got some wicked CA. However, I would say that it actually perfoms better on digital sensors than it did on film because it's so much easier to correct for CA in PS.
I totally agree that APS will stay for a while, but not only for amateurs with a limited budget (look at Nikon prices or to the Canon17-55/2.8 price), but for those who take pictures out of studio and can't afford carrying the weighty Mark IIn or even 5D with 24-70L all day along.
--
Vlad
jensendk
Forum Enthusiast
I think Mamiya would be very sorry not being fullframe. same goes with the slop union (Sigma, Leica, Olympus and Panasonic) they consider 4/3 as fullframe, 4/3 is not a subset of another older system..
--
Jens Holm
--
Jens Holm
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum