Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 24/2 vs 21/2 vs 24/2.8

Subject: Re: [OM] 24/2 vs 21/2 vs 24/2.8
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:18:44 -0400
I think all the proof necessary is in your point #6.  :-)

Chuck Norcutt


On 10/22/2010 6:03 PM, Moose wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 4:40 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> How do we know that they don't already have them?
>
> Well, for one thing, AG says so. :-)
>
> A bit more seriously, some inductive reasoning:
>
> 1. The two DSLRs I have owned and the one P&S camera I've taken apart
> have highly reflective sensor surfaces. 2. Many other people, here
> (as below) and elsewhere have commented the same thing. 3. Several
> lens makers have made a big deal about their redesigned lens and/or
> coating formulas to minimize hot spotting from this source. 4.
> Multi-coated lens surfaces have very subdued reflections compared to
> uncoated ones. 5. Camera manufacturers eagerly promote any and all
> 'improvements' to their products, regardless of how effective they
> may be. 6. I've not seen any announcements or marketing noise about
> such a development.
>
> Thus, I think it highly likely that they aren't yet in use.
>
> Now why they aren't coated like lens surfaces, I don't know.
>
> Logical but Puzzled Moose
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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