Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Notice something interesting about Sony R1?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
September 9, 2005 8:36:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
828 which has a much smaller sensor.
Is it about time that DSLR producers of 1.5x cameras
stopped using clunky old second-rate 35mm legacy lenses
and STARTED using digitally-dedicated lenses that could
conceivably be much smaller??
-Rich
Anonymous
September 9, 2005 9:30:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Rich wrote:
> The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
> 828 which has a much smaller sensor.
> Is it about time that DSLR producers of 1.5x cameras
> stopped using clunky old second-rate 35mm legacy lenses
> and STARTED using digitally-dedicated lenses that could
> conceivably be much smaller??
> -Rich


I wish there is a way to eliminate this troll premanantly.
The answer is DX. If you want to make it even smaller and can put in an
F-type mount, register your patent and sell it to Nikon.
September 9, 2005 9:30:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"No, it's about time they make full sized square sensors and stop the
stupid
cropping game."

What are the dimensions of a "full sized square sensor"??? (30.6 x
30.6mm ?)
Related resources
September 10, 2005 1:35:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rich" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:3fs3i1hijsabcm834ic3p23hc1igna5uvb@4ax.com...
> The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
> 828 which has a much smaller sensor.
> Is it about time that DSLR producers of 1.5x cameras
> stopped using clunky old second-rate 35mm legacy lenses
> and STARTED using digitally-dedicated lenses that could
> conceivably be much smaller??
> -Rich


Have you noticed that there are still a fair number of people using 35mm
film SLRs. Some also have DSLRs. They often tend to have a fair range of
lenses, and those designed for Film, can be used on Digital.

But the Digital-dedicated lenses don't work on film.

So the Digital-only lenses on the market are mostly Wide to Standard Angle,
because Film lenses don't give Wide angle on digital.

With Tele lenses both camera types can use them successfully.

So why would the makers spend lots of money on producing an additional lens
type which can only be of use on one Camera type.

Roy G
Anonymous
September 10, 2005 1:35:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 21:35:07 GMT, "Roy"
<royphoty@iona-guesthouse.co.uk> wrote:

>"Rich" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>news:3fs3i1hijsabcm834ic3p23hc1igna5uvb@4ax.com...
>> The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
>> 828 which has a much smaller sensor.
>> Is it about time that DSLR producers of 1.5x cameras
>> stopped using clunky old second-rate 35mm legacy lenses
>> and STARTED using digitally-dedicated lenses that could
>> conceivably be much smaller??
>> -Rich
>
>
>Have you noticed that there are still a fair number of people using 35mm
>film SLRs. Some also have DSLRs. They often tend to have a fair range of
>lenses, and those designed for Film, can be used on Digital.
>
>But the Digital-dedicated lenses don't work on film.
>
>So the Digital-only lenses on the market are mostly Wide to Standard Angle,
>because Film lenses don't give Wide angle on digital.

Oh, that's strange as Zeiss 18mm and 21mm Distagons work very well on
Canon 1DsMkII's. But we are talking about a full format (35mm) sensor
here.


****************************************************

"The booksellers are generous liberal-minded men."

Samuel Johnson
"Life of Johnson" (J. Boswell), Vol. I, 1756
September 10, 2005 2:55:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Rich wrote:

> The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
> 828 which has a much smaller sensor.

And on the other hand it _is_ much larger than the lens
on my Rollei B35 which has a larger sensor again. Odd, that.

- Len
Anonymous
September 10, 2005 3:50:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rich" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:3fs3i1hijsabcm834ic3p23hc1igna5uvb@4ax.com...
> The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
> 828 which has a much smaller sensor.
> Is it about time that DSLR producers of 1.5x cameras
> stopped using clunky old second-rate 35mm legacy lenses
> and STARTED using digitally-dedicated lenses that could
> conceivably be much smaller??

No, it's about time they make full sized square sensors and stop the stupid
cropping game.

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
September 10, 2005 3:50:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:50:51 GMT, "Beach Bum"
<e.cartman@southpark.com> wrote:

>"Rich" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>news:3fs3i1hijsabcm834ic3p23hc1igna5uvb@4ax.com...
>> The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
>> 828 which has a much smaller sensor.
>> Is it about time that DSLR producers of 1.5x cameras
>> stopped using clunky old second-rate 35mm legacy lenses
>> and STARTED using digitally-dedicated lenses that could
>> conceivably be much smaller??
>
>No, it's about time they make full sized square sensors and stop the stupid
>cropping game.

Good point. They do, if you can afford a Hasselblad, Phase One, etc.
-Rich
Anonymous
September 10, 2005 4:28:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <3fs3i1hijsabcm834ic3p23hc1igna5uvb@4ax.com>, Rich says...
> The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
> 828 which has a much smaller sensor.

But the lens of the 828 is F2-2.4, vs. F2.8-4.8 for the R1. And the zoom
range is bigger.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/
Anonymous
September 10, 2005 4:28:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

And although I didn't have the chance to compare side by side, in my hands
the R1's lens seems detectably larger in diameter than the F-828's. The
whole camera feels very bulky.

More comment and pictures from the launch event are at:

http://dpnow.com/2113.html

Ian

Digital Photography Now
http://dpnow.com

"Alfred Molon" <alfredREMOVE_molon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d8c2ae1285e038c98ad36@news.supernews.com...
> In article <3fs3i1hijsabcm834ic3p23hc1igna5uvb@4ax.com>, Rich says...
>> The lens on it isn't much larger than the one on the
>> 828 which has a much smaller sensor.
>
> But the lens of the 828 is F2-2.4, vs. F2.8-4.8 for the R1. And the zoom
> range is bigger.
> --
>
> Alfred Molon
> ------------------------------
> Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
> Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/
!