If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
If you check this article:
http://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/w...-professional- mirrorless-was-a-fatal-mistake.54299/ the author is claiming that because the body is small, the lenses must be bigger to maintain the distance to the sensor. But is it perhaps because Sony is using an old lens design (suitable for DSLRs where the lens is further away from the sensor)? And if Sony used a different lens design, the lenses could be smaller (with the rear element closer to the sensor)? -- Alfred Molon Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
On 2016-04-05, Alfred Molon wrote:
If you check this article: http://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/w...-professional- mirrorless-was-a-fatal-mistake.54299/ the author is claiming that because the body is small, the lenses must be bigger to maintain the distance to the sensor. But is it perhaps because Sony is using an old lens design (suitable for DSLRs where the lens is further away from the sensor)? And if Sony used a different lens design, the lenses could be smaller (with the rear element closer to the sensor)? Here's what I think: If you can keep the rays of light coming from the lens more or less at right angles to the sensor regardless of the effective focal length and right across the picture then all your lenses will inherently be well matched to the sensor. Keeping a good distance between the sensor and the back of the lens achieves that. Lenses designed to make room for an SLR mirror will also meet that requirement, if fitted to a lens mount or adaptor that makes up for the slimmer body of a mirrorless camera. That isn't a bad thing. If you have lenses with a 'cone' of light coming out onto the sensor, you need to arrange the position and alignment of each sensor element to match the angle of the light in the cone at that particular spot. You can indeed make the lenses come closer to the sensor if you do that, but each lens will need a different sensor element arrangement to match the different 'cone' of light - or you'll get bad vignetting and distortion. This is much less of a problem with film, which responds pretty evenly regardless of the angle of the light cone from the lens, which is why lenses for film rangefinder cameras can be so compact and fit so close to the film. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
In article ,
Whiskers wrote: If you can keep the rays of light coming from the lens more or less at right angles to the sensor regardless of the effective focal length and right across the picture then all your lenses will inherently be well matched to the sensor. Keeping a good distance between the sensor and the back of the lens achieves that. Lenses designed to make room for an SLR mirror will also meet that requirement, if fitted to a lens mount or adaptor that makes up for the slimmer body of a mirrorless camera. That isn't a bad thing. longstanding myth. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 21:05:38 +0200, Alfred Molon
wrote: If you check this article: http://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/w...-professional- mirrorless-was-a-fatal-mistake.54299/ the author is claiming that because the body is small, the lenses must be bigger to maintain the distance to the sensor. But is it perhaps because Sony is using an old lens design (suitable for DSLRs where the lens is further away from the sensor)? And if Sony used a different lens design, the lenses could be smaller (with the rear element closer to the sensor)? I don't think so. With any lens, except at the very center, light rays approach the sensor at an angle to the surface. The closer that the lens is to the surface, the greater that the angle will be. There is a limit to the angularity that a sensor will accept and hence a limit on how close to the sensor that the lens can be. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: If you check this article: http://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/w...-professional- mirrorless-was-a-fatal-mistake.54299/ the author is claiming that because the body is small, the lenses must be bigger to maintain the distance to the sensor. But is it perhaps because Sony is using an old lens design (suitable for DSLRs where the lens is further away from the sensor)? And if Sony used a different lens design, the lenses could be smaller (with the rear element closer to the sensor)? I don't think so. With any lens, except at the very center, light rays approach the sensor at an angle to the surface. The closer that the lens is to the surface, the greater that the angle will be. There is a limit to the angularity that a sensor will accept and hence a limit on how close to the sensor that the lens can be. what matters is the exit pupil of the lens, not the back focus distance. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 18:56:19 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Whiskers wrote: If you can keep the rays of light coming from the lens more or less at right angles to the sensor regardless of the effective focal length and right across the picture then all your lenses will inherently be well matched to the sensor. Keeping a good distance between the sensor and the back of the lens achieves that. Lenses designed to make room for an SLR mirror will also meet that requirement, if fitted to a lens mount or adaptor that makes up for the slimmer body of a mirrorless camera. That isn't a bad thing. longstanding myth. No. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 19:42:34 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: If you check this article: http://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/w...-professional- mirrorless-was-a-fatal-mistake.54299/ the author is claiming that because the body is small, the lenses must be bigger to maintain the distance to the sensor. But is it perhaps because Sony is using an old lens design (suitable for DSLRs where the lens is further away from the sensor)? And if Sony used a different lens design, the lenses could be smaller (with the rear element closer to the sensor)? I don't think so. With any lens, except at the very center, light rays approach the sensor at an angle to the surface. The closer that the lens is to the surface, the greater that the angle will be. There is a limit to the angularity that a sensor will accept and hence a limit on how close to the sensor that the lens can be. what matters is the exit pupil of the lens, not the back focus distance. Yes, but keeping the exit pupil forward requires a longer lens, hence defeating the attempt to obtain a shorter lens. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: If you can keep the rays of light coming from the lens more or less at right angles to the sensor regardless of the effective focal length and right across the picture then all your lenses will inherently be well matched to the sensor. Keeping a good distance between the sensor and the back of the lens achieves that. Lenses designed to make room for an SLR mirror will also meet that requirement, if fitted to a lens mount or adaptor that makes up for the slimmer body of a mirrorless camera. That isn't a bad thing. longstanding myth. No. yes. lenses have been retrofocus well before digital so the rays are already fairly parallel and the refractive index of silicon makes it impossible for the angle to matter all that much. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: If you check this article: http://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/w...-professional- mirrorless-was-a-fatal-mistake.54299/ the author is claiming that because the body is small, the lenses must be bigger to maintain the distance to the sensor. But is it perhaps because Sony is using an old lens design (suitable for DSLRs where the lens is further away from the sensor)? And if Sony used a different lens design, the lenses could be smaller (with the rear element closer to the sensor)? I don't think so. With any lens, except at the very center, light rays approach the sensor at an angle to the surface. The closer that the lens is to the surface, the greater that the angle will be. There is a limit to the angularity that a sensor will accept and hence a limit on how close to the sensor that the lens can be. what matters is the exit pupil of the lens, not the back focus distance. Yes, but keeping the exit pupil forward requires a longer lens, hence defeating the attempt to obtain a shorter lens. you're ignoring that the closer the exit pupil is, the smaller the coverage circle is. you're *not* going to get a 4mm lens covering full frame, for example, but that length is common on cellphone cameras. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Sony FF mirrorless lens size
On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 22:06:05 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: If you check this article: http://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/w...-professional- mirrorless-was-a-fatal-mistake.54299/ the author is claiming that because the body is small, the lenses must be bigger to maintain the distance to the sensor. But is it perhaps because Sony is using an old lens design (suitable for DSLRs where the lens is further away from the sensor)? And if Sony used a different lens design, the lenses could be smaller (with the rear element closer to the sensor)? I don't think so. With any lens, except at the very center, light rays approach the sensor at an angle to the surface. The closer that the lens is to the surface, the greater that the angle will be. There is a limit to the angularity that a sensor will accept and hence a limit on how close to the sensor that the lens can be. what matters is the exit pupil of the lens, not the back focus distance. Yes, but keeping the exit pupil forward requires a longer lens, hence defeating the attempt to obtain a shorter lens. you're ignoring that the closer the exit pupil is, the smaller the coverage circle is. you're *not* going to get a 4mm lens covering full frame, for example, but that length is common on cellphone cameras. But so what? We are talking about full frame, not cellphone cameras. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DSLR sales continue to lose traction (mirrorless, Sony inparticular growth up) | George Kerby | Digital Photography | 1 | September 20th 15 05:44 PM |
DSLR sales continue to lose traction (mirrorless, Sony in particular growth up) | Eric Stevens | Digital Photography | 0 | September 20th 15 09:21 AM |
Sony beats Nikon to FF mirrorless | Rich[_6_] | Digital Photography | 15 | September 18th 12 05:49 PM |
Sony's Alpha 700 replacement to be mirrorless SLT, with APS-C sensor | R. Mark Clayton | Digital SLR Cameras | 6 | September 28th 10 10:09 PM |
|GG| Mirrorless cameras still constrained by lens sizes | Paul Furman | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | September 12th 09 10:04 PM |