Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Canon FF Rumor

Subject: [OM] Re: Canon FF Rumor
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 17:34:27 -0500
I believe what I said about 35mm vs medium and large format lenses.  The 
smaller the lens format the higher the resolving power of the typical 
lens.  However, when it comes to telescopes, resolving power is very 
much controlled by aperture.  The bigger the better up to about 12" 
diameter whereupon atmospheric turbulence limits resolution to a 12" (or 
so) equivalent.  But that's old think.  I'm sure that modern turbulence 
compensating devices are doing better than that these days but I don't 
know how much better.

Chuck Norcutt

Moose wrote:
> AG Schnozz wrote:
>> Dr. Flash wrote:
>>   
>>> Given that 2-1/4 medium format lenses normally don't have to
>>> resolve as much detail as a 35mm lens it may be that the Hassy
>>> could have as much or more trouble resolving them tiny 
>>> pixels as the Canyon glass.
>>>     
>> I'm not sure how that theory started, but I'll put *most* Hassy
>> lenses up against 35mm lenses any day.  And how about large format? 
>> There's some really awesome large-format lenses which really stomp
>> that theory.  
> Is it possible that you and Dr.Flash are saying different things?
> 
> At the same distance and with the same angular coverage lenses and with 
> the subject the same physical size on a large print, I agree with you 
> that MF and LF will generally outperform 35 mm; the larger the display 
> size the more so. This is about system resolving power at display size.
> 
> However, if you take the images with the same focal length lenses and 
> blow up 24x36 portions of MF and LF film the same amount as the 35 mm 
> frame, I believe you will find the 35 mm to be better. This is about 
> absolute lens resolving power at the film plane.
> 
> As Winsor has pointed out, photo magazine tests used to show such a 
> difference in lens resolving power.
> 
> I also don't believe in free lunches in optical physics. The possibility 
> that an 80 mm lens that has to cover an image circle of 114 mm can be 
> designed to resolve the same lp/mm in the center, let alone the edge as 
> one that only has to cover a 44 mm image circle, assuming the same 
> quality design, glass, coatings, etc., seems simply unlikely to me. 
> There is certainly no other area of optics and photography where 
> compromises aren't necessary. Back in my days as a physics student last 
> century, I might have even been able to mathematically prove it - or 
> not. :-)
>> However, if the theory IS TRUE, then the E-system should be far superior to 
>> Full-Frame 35mm format.  Right?
>>   
> In system resolving power at display size, wrong at large display sizes.
> 
> In absolute lens resolving power at the film plane, right. I assume here 
> for theoretical reasons no interference from an AA filter.
> 
> Moose
> 
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
> 
> 

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz