Notice something interesting about Sony R1?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Rich, Sep 9, 2005.

  1. Rich

    Rich Guest

    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
     
    Rich, Sep 9, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rich

    l e o Guest

    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.
     
    l e o, Sep 9, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rich

    Roy Guest

    "Rich" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 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
     
    Roy, Sep 9, 2005
    #3
  4. On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 21:35:07 GMT, "Roy"
    <> wrote:

    >"Rich" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> 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
     
    John A. Stovall, Sep 9, 2005
    #4
  5. Rich

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <>, 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/
     
    Alfred Molon, Sep 9, 2005
    #5
  6. Rich

    Leonard Guest

    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
     
    Leonard, Sep 9, 2005
    #6
  7. 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" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>, 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/
     
    Digital Photography Now, Sep 10, 2005
    #7
  8. Rich

    Beach Bum Guest

    "Rich" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 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
     
    Beach Bum, Sep 10, 2005
    #8
  9. Rich

    BC Guest

    "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 ?)
     
    BC, Sep 10, 2005
    #9
  10. Rich

    Rich Guest

    On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:50:51 GMT, "Beach Bum"
    <> wrote:

    >"Rich" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> 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
     
    Rich, Sep 10, 2005
    #10
    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. Jeff Ingram
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    709
    Leonidas Jones
    Dec 1, 2004
  2. This Old Man

    Re: CISCO IOS UPGRADE NOTICE

    This Old Man, Jul 18, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    550
    Rod Dorman
    Jul 23, 2003
  3. Steve Young

    something interesting about Minolta

    Steve Young, Oct 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    310
    Clu LeSnooby
    Oct 21, 2003
  4. mike at mojo buzz

    something interesting ( at least to me ) IP recovered

    mike at mojo buzz, Nov 1, 2005, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    379
    Jim Watt
    Nov 1, 2005
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    463
    RichA
    Jun 6, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page