Why does Nikon keep making FF lenses?

In article ,
"Neil Harrington" wrote:

If we don't "[compare] everything to 35mm," what would we
compare everything to? In digital there isn't any standard.

You don't need to compare any sensor or film size to any other film size
to use it effectively. Bigger sensor or film, more details, more need
for more light, shallower depth of field over the complete
sensor/negative. Beyond that, it's all a question of what lenses work
with what cameras. In large format, if the image circle is big enough,
you can use the same lens on 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10, regardless of the
camera brands. Does the lens cover this format is the question, not
what the lens would do with another format.

C J Campbell wrote:
Give me a break. No DSLR had a 35mm sensor until the 1DS.

Actually, no. The Contax N Digital was first.


--
--Bryan

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
Neil Harrington wrote:

For that matter, why stop at the 120 film formats? Why isn't an 8x10
view camera "the only true full frame"?

Probably because of the 20x24 view camera.

8.5 ins x 6.5 ins (whole plate)
6.5 ins x 4.75 ins (half-plate)
4.25 ins x 3.25 ins (quarter-plate)

Bill Funk wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:25:41 -0500, Not Disclosed
wrote:

Huge discounts, and price drops indicate lackluster sales.

Or a soon-to-be-released new model.
The 5D was announced Q3 of 05; in digital camera years, it's getting
old.
The fact the
highest sales are on 6 megapixel dSLR like the Nikon D50, the Pentax
K110D and K100D. Canon's next dSLR will be a 6 megapixel sub $500 usd
camera.

Possibly.


I think Canon may drop the price again on the 5D, or do a 20D to 30D
upgrade.

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:24:38 -0500, Not Disclosed
wrote:

Bill Funk wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:25:41 -0500, Not Disclosed
wrote:

Huge discounts, and price drops indicate lackluster sales.

Or a soon-to-be-released new model.
The 5D was announced Q3 of 05; in digital camera years, it's getting
old.
The fact the
highest sales are on 6 megapixel dSLR like the Nikon D50, the Pentax
K110D and K100D. Canon's next dSLR will be a 6 megapixel sub $500 usd
camera.

Possibly.


I think Canon may drop the price again on the 5D, or do a 20D to 30D
upgrade.

They may, especially if they are going to replace it soon.
In that case, though, you may beat yourself up because you didn't buy
the replacement. :-(
Myself (and this is me, myself, I), I don't wait much. If th3e price
drops right after I buy something (and it seems to with great
regularity), that's life. I just tell my friends when I'm buying
something, and they wait a week, and get the lower price. :-)

--
Senate Democrats proposed ethics
reform legislation on Tuesday.
It calls for lawmakers to pay the
real cost of corporate jet flights
and the full cost of skybox tickets
for sporting events. If you want
to know ahead of time what's going
to happen to this bill, you simply
need to watch the last five minutes
of Old Yeller.

Jeroen Wenting wrote:
[...]
Anyway, anything is full frame for a given definition of "frame".
DX is "full frame", so is 645, so is 35mm, and so is 6x6.

True in the trivial sense of anything being fully whatever
size it is. With respect to 35mm film, the usage is different,
and significant.

35mm was initially a movie film format. The 35mm measure
includes the area punched with sprocket holes. The usable
width between the lines of sprocket holes is about 24mm. In
the original movie format, the frame is about 24x18mm, with
the width of the frame laid out between the columns of
sprocket holes. That's called 35mm half-frame. 35mm
full-frame lays out the frame so that 24mm is the shorter
side, yielding a frame twice as large in the same aspect
ratio.

Round these parts, "full frame" means 35mm full-frame. The
Nikon digitals use a format a bit smaller than half-frame.


--
--Bryan

tomm42 wrote:
Full frame is a useless statement for all the reasons that have been
stated. It is just to belittle the APS sensor which in its current form
is better than most 6x4.5 cameras. The use of 35mm sized sensor is far
more accurate and descriptive no matter what forum you are in.

No, because there are two 35mm film formats: full-frame and half-frame.
"35mm" doesn't specify a known format, and no interesting measure of
the frame is 35mm. The better term is "35mm full-frame".


--
--Bryan

Neil Harrington wrote:
[...]
So in that case it's a focal length divider. As generally used it's a focal
length multiplier, though that term has mostly been abandoned since it
annoys people.

It annoys people because it's wrong. A 100mm focal-length lens has a
focal length equivalent to 100mm and not equivalent to any other focal
length, no matter what sensor is behind it.


--
--Bryan

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:00:41 -0800, Matt Clara wrote
(in article ):

"Charles" wrote in message
...
Maybe because people keep buying them?


Last time I checked, Nikon still produces at least one film camera for them.



The F6, which I suspect will be around for a long time, and the FM10, for
those who want to do everything manually. There are still reasons to use
film. Actually, the FM10 is a pretty reasonable beginner's camera.

Neil Harrington wrote:
[...]
But even if you do take "crop" to refer to only the part that remains, "crop
factor is 1.5" still makes no sense. Can you crop something so as to end up
with 1.5 of it?

It's interpreted the other way: looking at the cropped image, we figure
how much there could have been by multiplying by the crop factor.


--
--Bryan