Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,247   Posts: 1,660,242   Online: 1034
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30
  1. #1
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,453
    Images
    6

    Snake Oil For your Lens

    Is this a bunch of BS?

    http://www.metabones.com/
    “We are buried beneath the weight of information, which is being confused with knowledge; quantity is being confused with abundance and wealth with happiness.
    We are monkeys with money and guns.”

    ― Tom Waits

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainecoonmaniac View Post
    Is this a bunch of BS?

    http://www.metabones.com/
    Of course. Penis enlargement for optics.

  3. #3
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,453
    Images
    6

    Extenze for your lens?

    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    Of course. Penis enlargement for optics.
    For those inadequate photographers that need that little something?
    “We are buried beneath the weight of information, which is being confused with knowledge; quantity is being confused with abundance and wealth with happiness.
    We are monkeys with money and guns.”

    ― Tom Waits

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    558
    Short answer: No, it's not a bunch of BS. Theoretically very sound.

    It's very different from "penis enlargement" because "penis enlargement" suggests that the penis is enlarged while the rest of the body stays the same size. This technology only works because (a) it takes a lens from a larger (135) format and uses it on a smaller (APS-C) format, and (b) it utilizes the big difference in the flange focal distance between SLR (EF mount) and a mirrorless (E mount).

    Making the lens focal length 1.5x shorter and adding 1-stop in aperture while moving from FF to APS-C is, in fact, only letting that lens act on the APS-C sensor exactly as it would on FF. Really, it's not even magical.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    396
    Images
    20
    Nothing new here, this is a focal length reducer. Clear aperture being the same as the f.l. is reduced yields to a lower f/d ratio. This is (was?) widely used with Schmidt-Cassegrain telecopes which have a rather high f/d ratio (usually 10 or 11) for photography purpose mainly. I doubt it increases the image quality though...
    "The problem with photography is that it only deals with appearances." Duane Michals

    "Only weak pictures need perfection." David Vestal

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    558
    I agree, the only part about their claims that's dubious is that this will somehow increase image quality. The best we could hope for is that image quality degradation is suppressed to a minimum.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by rawhead View Post
    Short answer: No, it's not a bunch of BS. Theoretically very sound.

    It's very different from "penis enlargement" because "penis enlargement" suggests that the penis is enlarged while the rest of the body stays the same size. This technology only works because (a) it takes a lens from a larger (135) format and uses it on a smaller (APS-C) format, and (b) it utilizes the big difference in the flange focal distance between SLR (EF mount) and a mirrorless (E mount).

    Making the lens focal length 1.5x shorter and adding 1-stop in aperture while moving from FF to APS-C is, in fact, only letting that lens act on the APS-C sensor exactly as it would on FF. Really, it's not even magical.
    You'd better recheck your theory. It "reduces" the focal length by adding an extra element to an existing optical system - the extra element has not been calculated to work with that system. It's the reverse of a telephoto exender, with all the attendant problems and even more aberrations. "Improves MTF"? Please.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainecoonmaniac View Post
    For those inadequate photographers that need that little something?
    Well, I'd say it's for the current crop of less-than-knowledgeable equipment junkies who think gadgets equal skill and believe everything they read.
    I'm surprised there was no claim for improved bokeh.

  9. #9
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,453
    Images
    6
    Improve MTF? Is MTF "Male Transfer Function"?
    “We are buried beneath the weight of information, which is being confused with knowledge; quantity is being confused with abundance and wealth with happiness.
    We are monkeys with money and guns.”

    ― Tom Waits

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainecoonmaniac View Post
    Improve MTF? Is MTF "Male Transfer Function"?
    "Money Transfer Factor"; from the gadgetographer's account to metabone's.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin