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
|
|||
|
|||
Good lens, high MP camera = superior combination
"RichA" wrote in message
... For all those thinking 12-15 megapixels is just "fine" take a look at the resolution differences of this lens on a 24 megapixel FF and an APS sensored camera with fewer MP. Despite the inevitable softening at the edge of the FF, overall the resolution is hugely better in the FF 24MP camera. $2000 for the FF camera (850) and about $1000 for the APS. All that seems to be happening with the APS is that you are short-changing the Zeiss lens. http://dpreview.com/lensreviews/sony_24_2_m15/ "All that seems to be happening with the APS" is that you are buying an over-specified lens for your camera, and paying the size, weight, and cost penalties. David |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Good lens, high MP camera = superior combination
"RichA" wrote in message
... [] Over-specified implies the APS is incapable of showing what the lens is capable of resolving. Fair enough. But has anyone ever seen an APS sensor image that didn't benefit from a better lens? In other words, if Sony made one of their generic lenses in the same focal length, and you compared it with the Zeiss lens on an APS, we should see no difference in resolving power, provided the Sony lens met a minimum spec? No. In this case "over-specified" means using a lens with a nominal image circle of ~43mm, whereas an image circle of ~28mm would suffice. Such a lens would be lighter, smaller and cheaper. Whatever the sensor size, provided it is correctly fitted with an anti-alias low-pass filter, there will be no point in providing the sensor with information beyond the cut-off point of the filter and sensor combination. What may matter more is having a good MTF up to that cut-off frequency. Of course, the cut-off isn't sharp, so there won't be a precise numerical answer to the requirement. I could also see a lens as being "over-specified" in such circumstances. David |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Good lens, high MP camera = superior combination
"John A." wrote in message
... [] I say if you're the sort who periodically upgrades your camera body, go ahead and get at least somewhat "over-specified" lenses if you can afford it. If you alternate between buying lenses over-specified for your body and bodies over-specified for your lenses you'll always see an improvement with every purchase. Yes, that makes sense, but carried to extreme, it means you should always buy full-frame lenses, just in case your next upgrade is to a full-frame camera. I, for one, don't want the cost, size or weight penalty that would incur! G David |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Good lens, high MP camera = superior combination
"RichA" wrote in message
... [] I don't think any company has really matched bodies to lenses in a major way except at the pro level or Leica. ... and in all the fixed-lens cameras, of course. You can buy a Nikon D300s with weather sealing, but you can't buy too many DX lenses with that, you have to go to the FX level, as far as I know. The cost to have what might amount to five or six sets of lenses would be prohibitive for the company. David |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Factor Effecting High ISO Pictures - Camera or Lens | Manzoorul Hassan | Digital Photography | 12 | September 26th 07 07:54 AM |
How good is high ISO? | Richard Blackwood | Digital Photography | 8 | July 5th 06 06:47 PM |
lens hacking question: good movie camera lenses? | zeitgeist | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | June 20th 06 03:37 PM |
Olympus E-10 lens combination | Camon Crow | Digital Photography | 0 | January 29th 05 07:21 PM |
digital combination | -oo0-GoldTrader-0oo- | Digital SLR Cameras | 3 | December 3rd 04 04:11 PM |