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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Lourens Smak wrote:
There is only 1 such (full-frame) camera, made by Kodak. From: Alan Browne EOS 1Ds, 1Ds Mk II are full frame. Since the OP said he had a Nikon body Lourens was probably only thinking of full-frame bodies that accept Nikon lenses? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Lourens Smak wrote:
There is only 1 such (full-frame) camera, made by Kodak. From: Alan Browne EOS 1Ds, 1Ds Mk II are full frame. Since the OP said he had a Nikon body Lourens was probably only thinking of full-frame bodies that accept Nikon lenses? |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Hilton wrote:
Since the OP said he had a Nikon body Lourens was probably only thinking of full-frame bodies that accept Nikon lenses? Could be, but "There is only 1 such (full-frame) camera, made by Kodak." should have had the exception words (", that takes Nikon lenses.") in that case. Cheers, Alan -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Hilton wrote:
Since the OP said he had a Nikon body Lourens was probably only thinking of full-frame bodies that accept Nikon lenses? Could be, but "There is only 1 such (full-frame) camera, made by Kodak." should have had the exception words (", that takes Nikon lenses.") in that case. Cheers, Alan -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Hilton wrote:
Since the OP said he had a Nikon body Lourens was probably only thinking of full-frame bodies that accept Nikon lenses? Could be, but "There is only 1 such (full-frame) camera, made by Kodak." should have had the exception words (", that takes Nikon lenses.") in that case. Cheers, Alan -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Since the OP said he had a Nikon body Lourens was probably only thinking
of full-frame bodies that accept Nikon lenses? From: Alan Browne Could be, but "There is only 1 such (full-frame) camera, made by Kodak." should have had the exception words (", that takes Nikon lenses.") in that case. True, but then when you named the others you didn't mention the legendary Contax full-frame either |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Since the OP said he had a Nikon body Lourens was probably only thinking
of full-frame bodies that accept Nikon lenses? From: Alan Browne Could be, but "There is only 1 such (full-frame) camera, made by Kodak." should have had the exception words (", that takes Nikon lenses.") in that case. True, but then when you named the others you didn't mention the legendary Contax full-frame either |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Since the OP said he had a Nikon body Lourens was probably only thinking
of full-frame bodies that accept Nikon lenses? From: Alan Browne Could be, but "There is only 1 such (full-frame) camera, made by Kodak." should have had the exception words (", that takes Nikon lenses.") in that case. True, but then when you named the others you didn't mention the legendary Contax full-frame either |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:52:30 +0000, Dave wrote:
Lots of cameras use a 35mm film size - I have just bought one myself. Some new high-end digital SLR cameras use the same size CCD as conventional 35mm film. Do you think that such cameras would warrant lenses optimised for digital, so making lenses bought for 35mm film cameras less than optimal? I've just bought a Nikon F6 body and a rather expensive Nikon 70-200 IF-ED VR lens with vibration reduction (hence the VR) built into the lens. I'm wondering if such lenses, or other lenses designed for 35mm SLRs will need (or should) be replaced if using 35mm digital SLRs. Problems can arise if the lens design permits light to strike the sensor at too much of an angle. Film is far less sensitive to the angle of the light than the current generation of dSLR sensors. The other issue mentioned with using a 35mm "film" lens on a dSLR is flare, due reflections from the sensor off weak coatings towards the rear of the lens. At least two 3rd party lens manufacturers have released "digitally optimized" versions of old optical designs supposedly to address this issue. I say supposedly, because there are conflicting marketing claims being made. Nikon claims it isn't an issue due their sensor design. I've also heard claims that Canon changed lens coatings some time ago to address the issue. What I haven't seen is before/after shots showing the effects of the improvements. You might want to talk to a 14n or Canon 1Ds (Mark I or II) shooter, but I haven't heard of any such problems with the 70-200 zooms. I'm just wondering if money invested in lenses for file cameras will need to be replaced - like manual focus lenses need to be replaced on auotfocus SLRs. Any need to replace manual focus lenses derived from a change in lens mount (Canon, Minolta) or marketing decisions (Nikon and Pentax). It would have been trivial for Nikon to offer stop-down metering with AI and AI-S lenses on the N/F80, D100 and D70, and their decision not to cost them customers. -- Michael Benveniste -- Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email address only to submit mail for evaluation. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:52:30 +0000, Dave wrote:
Lots of cameras use a 35mm film size - I have just bought one myself. Some new high-end digital SLR cameras use the same size CCD as conventional 35mm film. Do you think that such cameras would warrant lenses optimised for digital, so making lenses bought for 35mm film cameras less than optimal? I've just bought a Nikon F6 body and a rather expensive Nikon 70-200 IF-ED VR lens with vibration reduction (hence the VR) built into the lens. I'm wondering if such lenses, or other lenses designed for 35mm SLRs will need (or should) be replaced if using 35mm digital SLRs. Problems can arise if the lens design permits light to strike the sensor at too much of an angle. Film is far less sensitive to the angle of the light than the current generation of dSLR sensors. The other issue mentioned with using a 35mm "film" lens on a dSLR is flare, due reflections from the sensor off weak coatings towards the rear of the lens. At least two 3rd party lens manufacturers have released "digitally optimized" versions of old optical designs supposedly to address this issue. I say supposedly, because there are conflicting marketing claims being made. Nikon claims it isn't an issue due their sensor design. I've also heard claims that Canon changed lens coatings some time ago to address the issue. What I haven't seen is before/after shots showing the effects of the improvements. You might want to talk to a 14n or Canon 1Ds (Mark I or II) shooter, but I haven't heard of any such problems with the 70-200 zooms. I'm just wondering if money invested in lenses for file cameras will need to be replaced - like manual focus lenses need to be replaced on auotfocus SLRs. Any need to replace manual focus lenses derived from a change in lens mount (Canon, Minolta) or marketing decisions (Nikon and Pentax). It would have been trivial for Nikon to offer stop-down metering with AI and AI-S lenses on the N/F80, D100 and D70, and their decision not to cost them customers. -- Michael Benveniste -- Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email address only to submit mail for evaluation. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
once agin: medium vs. digital | Steve Lefevre | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 39 | November 23rd 04 12:49 AM |
Sad news for film-based photography | Ronald Shu | 35mm Photo Equipment | 200 | October 6th 04 12:07 AM |
Will digital photography ever stabilize? | Alfred Molon | Digital Photography | 37 | June 30th 04 08:11 PM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 09:51 PM |