Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,225   Posts: 1,659,712   Online: 865
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1234 View Post
    I chanted (not said), "Abbra cadabra... FLOAT, you magical bit of optical wonder"!! Maybe I didn't use the correct chant?!
    You should have gone OM




    ()

  2. #22
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Someonenameddavid View Post
    You should have gone OM




    ()
    With a Nikkor?

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,884
    ^^^^ I think he meant o-o-h-h-m-m-m-m-m.......... o-o-h-h-m-m-m-m-m.......... o-o-h-h-m-m-m-m-m.......... o-o-h-h-m-m-m-m-m..........

    Then again, he was probably making a pun.

  4. #24
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,721
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    I should have added that retro-focus wide-angle lenses are much more prone to reduction of image quality at different focussing distance (typically short distances) than standard wide-angle constructions.

    That is why there are no floating elements used in those.
    Ahem....getting back to the original topic, I agree with this. Wide lenses on SLRs are already at a disadvantage, so anything to improve them is a good thing. Another fault of wide retrofocus lenses at close subject distances can be significant barrel/pincushion distortion, even if they are close to perfectly rectilinear at, say 6 feet or infinity.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  5. #25
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1234 View Post
    ^^^^ I think he meant o-o-h-h-m-m-m-m-m.......... o-o-h-h-m-m-m-m-m.......... o-o-h-h-m-m-m-m-m.......... o-o-h-h-m-m-m-m-m..........
    Seems like that would create a lot of resistance.

  6. #26
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1234 View Post

    Then again, he was probably making a pun.
    It lens itself to that.

    Not that I'm OM-niscient.

  7. #27
    Prest_400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    588
    I've got a OM zuiko 28mm f3.5 and it's a brilliant little performer. I haven't used it very extensively but it has performed well when I did. Would it be f2.8 or f2, and I'd be using this much more. The VF brightness is a bit low, but very useable. I often like to use it with a PL and the VF gets dim.
    It seems better than the 50mm f1.8 at close focus. The 50mm shows a mild curvature of field, the 28mm doesn't. I believe that the slow aperture may help to have a better performance.

    They say that this lens has a small cult following in Japan's OM users, and I've even heard of it being as good as some RF leica wide.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,174
    Images
    17
    I have owned my Zuiko 21mm f2.0 for almost 25 years and I really love the performance of this lens. Remember the old advice on wide angle lenses "Take one step forward." With a super wide lens such as this it is a good compositional tool to try and get closer to the subject. I frequently focus this lens at some surprisingly close distances.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,884
    Floating elements are a good thing. They can make macro lenses perform just as well at infinity. In fact, many photographers buy macro lenses with floating elements and not the standards of the same FL. The down side is Macro lenses have smaller max apertures... at least the last time I checked they did. The point is that optical resolution is maximized and distortion is minimized from their closest focusing distance through to infinity focus. When I had my 55 Micro Nkkor I didn't own a 50 prime because I didn't need the speed. That lens was NICE!!

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,682
    Floating elements are not just good in macro lenses. They help maintain image quality in all lenses that have difficulty doing so otherwise over the range they are supposed to be used in.

    Many macro lenses are of a design that isn't very 'scale sensitive', i.e. they work great over a very wide range of distances. And they may not be in need (if at all) of floating elements as much as some other lenses, like retrofocus wide angle lenses and zoom lenses (zooming itself is achieved by 'floating' elements, but image quality suffers. It can be kept up by 'floating' more elements.)

    The original question, i believe, was whether it was worth to spend the extra cash needed to get an FLE version of a focal length also available as a non-FLE, 'normal', lens.
    The answer to that depends on how good the non-FLE is. The gain in performance achieved by adding floating elements in the design may be small. It may also be quite significant.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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