Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,935   Posts: 1,585,616   Online: 738
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: Fastest lens?

  1. #21
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Hoskinson View Post
    jamie, What's a lense?

    Is it anything like a lens?
    Lense is an archaic spelling of lens. Not in common usage, but still correct in some circles, especially medicine.

  2. #22
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by mabman View Post
    Not sure it's worth ~$6k for a brighter viewfinder, but an interesting point none the less.
    Yup, as an RF lens it's not going to help the brightness And at least in my book, schlepping a big hunka glass like that kinda defeats the purpose of an RF.

    Indeed, for most (all?) of us, $6k doesn't make sense for this lens... nor the M8. But still I'm happy to see Leica and CZ sticking to their strengths: great new optics. I suspect that both companies would do more for their brand names and their bottom line by sticking to optics and letting others build the bodies.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Terence View Post
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...MPLATE=DEFAULT

    I think they're a little hyperbolic here. Wasn't there a f/0.95 Canon lens before?
    Did you even read the article? The Canon lens is mentioned, and the article does not say "fastest lens *ever*".

    Quote Originally Posted by mabman View Post
    A practical question: in the real world how usable is a lens at f/0.95? The DOF would be extremely shallow (I checked DOFMaster, but it currently only goes down to f/1, which is still pretty shallow - a 50mm lens on an M8 calculates as 0.55 ft. of total DOF at f/1).
    ...at what focusing distance? 0.55 feet is over six inches of d of f, which is more than average for the average low-light shot that I take! Where it would get tough would be close focusing, which is already problematic with a rangefinder.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 09-21-2008 at 03:27 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    New Jersey (again)
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,008
    At 4 1/2 feet (typical portrait distance for a 50mm lens), an f/1.0 lens will give you approximately 1.7 inches depth of focus. The difference between f/0.95 and f/1.0 is almost statistically insignificant and in a production lens probably would be photographically insignificant. Anyway, you have a slim margin of error when focusing.

    Obviously, best used with a camera that has an accurate and calibrated rangefinder system.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by JBrunner View Post
    Lense is an archaic spelling of lens. Not in common usage, but still correct in some circles, especially medicine.
    Jason, lense is a Wikicism.

    Or, perhaps the reference was to physicist Joseph Lense?
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,346
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    Did you even read the article? The Canon lens is mentioned, and the article does not say "fastest lens *ever*".
    And did you read the thread? :rolleyes: I note a few posts down that I somehow read the article twice and missed the line about Canon.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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