I'd like a 25mm f/0.5 lens for m4/3rds please

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Feb 17, 2012.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Sure, it would be tough to make, but good for bragging rights for
    whichever company did it. Lenses of that speed have been made, but
    the only ones I'm familiar with (actually seen) have be scientific
    mirror lenses where the film was actually inside the lens itself. A
    refractive optic would be very interesting. The fastest refractive
    lens I've owned was a 65mm f0.75 made for an X-ray machine. I could
    just achieve focus on a m4/3rds camera at infinity with it. The lens
    was about 4" across and cost $6000.00 originally.
    Image quality was (needless to say) soft! But with modern production
    techniques and molded aspherics/ED/SuperED glass, they could probably
    do a bit better.
    RichA, Feb 17, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Ray Fischer Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >Sure, it would be tough to make, but good for bragging rights for
    >whichever company did it. Lenses of that speed have been made, but
    >the only ones I'm familiar with (actually seen) have be scientific
    >mirror lenses where the film was actually inside the lens itself. A
    >refractive optic would be very interesting. The fastest refractive
    >lens I've owned was a 65mm f0.75 made for an X-ray machine. I could
    >just achieve focus on a m4/3rds camera at infinity with it. The lens
    >was about 4" across and cost $6000.00 originally.
    >Image quality was (needless to say) soft! But with modern production
    >techniques and molded aspherics/ED/SuperED glass, they could probably
    >do a bit better.


    Why don't you hire somebody to make one?

    Start a business?

    Isn't that the capitalist's answer to everything?

    --
    Ray Fischer | None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
    | Goethe
    Ray Fischer, Feb 19, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 2/18/2012 9:26 PM, Rich wrote:
    > (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4f404f2d$0$11987
    > $:
    >
    >> RichA<> wrote:
    >>> Sure, it would be tough to make, but good for bragging rights for
    >>> whichever company did it. Lenses of that speed have been made, but
    >>> the only ones I'm familiar with (actually seen) have be scientific
    >>> mirror lenses where the film was actually inside the lens itself. A
    >>> refractive optic would be very interesting. The fastest refractive
    >>> lens I've owned was a 65mm f0.75 made for an X-ray machine. I could
    >>> just achieve focus on a m4/3rds camera at infinity with it. The lens
    >>> was about 4" across and cost $6000.00 originally.
    >>> Image quality was (needless to say) soft! But with modern production
    >>> techniques and molded aspherics/ED/SuperED glass, they could probably
    >>> do a bit better.

    >>
    >> Why don't you hire somebody to make one?
    >>
    >> Start a business?
    >>
    >> Isn't that the capitalist's answer to everything?
    >>

    >
    > Get a job, loser.


    Mirror

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Feb 19, 2012
    #3
  4. On 2/18/2012 7:23 PM, Ray Fischer wrote:
    > RichA<> wrote:
    >> Sure, it would be tough to make, but good for bragging rights for
    >> whichever company did it. Lenses of that speed have been made, but
    >> the only ones I'm familiar with (actually seen) have be scientific
    >> mirror lenses where the film was actually inside the lens itself. A
    >> refractive optic would be very interesting. The fastest refractive
    >> lens I've owned was a 65mm f0.75 made for an X-ray machine. I could
    >> just achieve focus on a m4/3rds camera at infinity with it. The lens
    >> was about 4" across and cost $6000.00 originally.
    >> Image quality was (needless to say) soft! But with modern production
    >> techniques and molded aspherics/ED/SuperED glass, they could probably
    >> do a bit better.

    >
    > Why don't you hire somebody to make one?
    >
    > Start a business?
    >
    > Isn't that the capitalist's answer to everything?
    >


    f/0.5 is not acheivable with an air gap between the lens
    and sensor. F/0.75 is, but that X-ray machine lens was
    designed for close-ups and probably was more like f/0.9
    or f/1.1 on the output side, used as intended. I have
    an f/0.8 lens of the same sort. It is soft used as
    intended at a 2:1 image reduction, but at infinity
    it barely produces an image.

    Doug McDonald
    Doug McDonald, Feb 19, 2012
    #4
  5. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <jhra7n$rdp$>, Doug McDonald
    <> wrote:

    > f/0.5 is not acheivable with an air gap between the lens
    > and sensor.


    yes it is, although not necessarily cost effective to produce.
    nospam, Feb 19, 2012
    #5
  6. RichA <> wrote:
    > refractive optic would be very interesting. The fastest refractive
    > lens I've owned was a 65mm f0.75 made for an X-ray machine. I could
    > just achieve focus on a m4/3rds camera at infinity with it. The lens
    > was about 4" across and cost $6000.00 originally.
    > Image quality was (needless to say) soft! But with modern production


    So you claim to own a lens and at least access to a m4/3rds camera?
    Really?

    I don't believe you.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 23, 2012
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    864
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
  2. Rich

    4/3rds fixed 3x zoom lens camera coming

    Rich, Jun 29, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    270
    Bowser
    Jun 30, 2010
  3. RichA

    The stupid, STUPID 4/3rds versus FF lens B.S.

    RichA, Oct 21, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    329
    Robert Coe
    Oct 24, 2010
  4. Ofnuts

    Re: The stupid, STUPID 4/3rds versus FF lens B.S.

    Ofnuts, Oct 24, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    528
    Ollie Clark
    Oct 27, 2010
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    295
    RichA
    Feb 2, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page