Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

  1. #1
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    I dunno if i have checked out enough lens, but there doesn't seem to be any 10-17mm range of ultrawide angle lens that have an aperture size of f/2.8 to f/3.5, and most of them start from f/4 to f/4.5 onwards.

    is it a technical impossible thing to achieve the above? i wonder if gurus can shed any light on this little puzzle i have.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    The Canon 10-22mm starts at F3.5 at the wide end.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    I think there's some relationship between the focal length, aperature size and the size of the outer most piece of glass(lens)...

    Notice that those with long focal length zoom lens with constant wide aperature tend to be very large...

  4. #4
    Senior Member StrifeYun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Rivervale Drive
    Posts
    2,216

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    hmm yaya i heard there is some calculation, hmmm maybe not possible ?
    where e gurus !!
    Canon EOS "Luxury"
    [flickr]

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,881

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Nikon has a 14mm f2.8 and just out of your spec there is a 18mm f2.8

  6. #6

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis View Post
    Nikon has a 14mm f2.8 and just out of your spec there is a 18mm f2.8
    I think he's refering to zoom lens.
    Prime shouldn't b a problem.

    i always confuse with zoom lens aperture to size relationship.
    Prime seems to be more straight forward.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Erm. The threadstarter is talking about zooms not primes. Of course there are "fast" ultra wide primes out there but none (I wouldn't call anything more than F2.8 fast) when looking at zooms. Olympus has a 11-22mm F2.8-3.5 but that's the 4 thirds system.. 22-44mm isn't that ultra wide anymore.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North
    Posts
    2,703

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    To the TS, if you are just asking if it is technically possible, then the answer is yes. If you followed the threads in the Canon forum, some have also mentioned rumours for the new release of canon 10-24mm f2.8 lens.

    So the question really bouys down to you... do you need that kind of aperture at this focal length. While there is no hard and fast rule governing focal lengths that these range should only be used for landscapes and no other aspects, you should also consider the cost/practically issue when you spend much more $$ on lens like these.

    For landscapes the norm for photographers is to use high f-stops of at least f11-f22. If you are using this focal length to take portraits, then be prepared to break the norm.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by yehosaphat View Post
    To the TS, if you are just asking if it is technically possible, then the answer is yes. If you followed the threads in the Canon forum, some have also mentioned rumours for the new release of canon 10-24mm f2.8 lens.

    So the question really bouys down to you... do you need that kind of aperture at this focal length. While there is no hard and fast rule governing focal lengths that these range should only be used for landscapes and no other aspects, you should also consider the cost/practically issue when you spend much more $$ on lens like these.

    For landscapes the norm for photographers is to use high f-stops of at least f11-f22. If you are using this focal length to take portraits, then be prepared to break the norm.
    TS is a Nikonian...

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    289

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by yehosaphat View Post
    To the TS, if you are just asking if it is technically possible, then the answer is yes. If you followed the threads in the Canon forum, some have also mentioned rumours for the new release of canon 10-24mm f2.8 lens.

    So the question really bouys down to you... do you need that kind of aperture at this focal length. While there is no hard and fast rule governing focal lengths that these range should only be used for landscapes and no other aspects, you should also consider the cost/practically issue when you spend much more $$ on lens like these.

    For landscapes the norm for photographers is to use high f-stops of at least f11-f22. If you are using this focal length to take portraits, then be prepared to break the norm.
    Agree with you..

    To TS:
    For technical reason, I believe Yeah..It's very simple. f/2.8 means your aperture needs to be open, say 10/2.8=3.5mm at diameter...the thing is for a focal length 10 mm lenses (means the distance between the center of the lenses to their focal length is only 10mm=1cm lah.my friend..the lenses must be supper convect group of glass (curve mah) then the effective area on the lense is very small. .hard to achieve until 3.5mm in diametter unless you use supper high index glass ..but then they have problem of CA. This small image area problem is solved only if you use smaller area sensor (small image area..er...that's why 10-22mm is an EF-s lens) And then for Zoom Lenses, the lenses need to move backward and forward to achieve different focal lengths. That's more difficults. For longer focal length lenses, it's a doable for fast lenses but with extremely high cost due to large glasses and conformal curve fabrication issue.

    I believe it's difficult to fabricate a 10mm prime lense also..

    About non-technical reason..I don't see the advantage of wide aperture lense for landscape (wide angle) shoot..Everybody uses tripod some more..Anyway, the diameter of the aperture for short focal length is also very small if you want it to be faster, how much it can be? Then if any one shoot portrait with a 10mm lens..er..how close he must stand to the model...he he..that' my 2 cents..I don't find any reason for a fast short focal length lens (even prime)..Haiz.but if you have money just buy lor..try and tell us the new lens 10-24 f2.8..I know Canon has the technologies to do a lot of impossible thing but to me..it's not my cup of tea..not for my shooting style..
    Last edited by standingup; 30th January 2007 at 12:28 PM.
    A person is useless unless he is standing up for himself, for his future, and for his dreams.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    why does everyone likes to associate wide angle lens with landscape? a wide angle lens can also use to capture streets life... etc at when lights are low, the wide aperture come in to play.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    So the questions are

    1) Is the technologically possible to produce for e.g. 10mm F/2 lens?
    Smallness may not be a problem because 10mm F/3.5 is even smaller. So are there any technical issues which make it impossible? Distortions? Extreme softness at wide open?

    Only engineers can answer these physics questions. May be some experts can shed some light on the above.

    2) Is there demand for lens like 10mm F/2?

    a) what is it suitable for, considering the shallow Depth of Field and picture quality (distortion, sharpness and other technical issues above) at wide open ?

    Yes, it is not necessarily for landscape only. It can be used for many other types of situation.

    As for DOF, it can be quite shallow even at this short focal length when it's wide open and the focal point is quite near. e.g. 10mm @F/2, subject distance 1 metre, the DOF on a APS-C sized sensor DSLR Canon 30D would be

    DOF (near) = 0.73m
    DOF (far) = 1.6m
    Total DOF = 1.6 - 0.73 = 0.87m
    DOF (infront subject) = 0.27m
    DOF (behind subject) = 0.60m

    b) Cost
    Related to technical difficulties as well as production economies of scale.
    The more difficult such lens can be produced, the more costly.

    The more demand there is, the more production there will be and this can lower down the average production and marketing cost per lens. To a certain extent, Cost and demand is a chicken and egg situation.

    I have only questions but no answers.
    Last edited by Clockunder; 30th January 2007 at 01:31 PM.

  13. #13
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by standingup View Post
    Agree with you..

    To TS:
    For technical reason, I believe Yeah..It's very simple. f/2.8 means your aperture needs to be open, say 10/2.8=3.5mm at diameter...the thing is for a focal length 10 mm lenses (means the distance between the center of the lenses to their focal length is only 10mm=1cm lah.my friend..the lenses must be supper convect group of glass (curve mah) then the effective area on the lense is very small. .hard to achieve until 3.5mm in diametter unless you use supper high index glass ..but then they have problem of CA. This small image area problem is solved only if you use smaller area sensor (small image area..er...that's why 10-22mm is an EF-s lens) And then for Zoom Lenses, the lenses need to move backward and forward to achieve different focal lengths. That's more difficults. For longer focal length lenses, it's a doable for fast lenses but with extremely high cost due to large glasses and conformal curve fabrication issue.

    I believe it's difficult to fabricate a 10mm prime lense also..

    About non-technical reason..I don't see the advantage of wide aperture lense for landscape (wide angle) shoot..Everybody uses tripod some more..Anyway, the diameter of the aperture for short focal length is also very small if you want it to be faster, how much it can be? Then if any one shoot portrait with a 10mm lens..er..how close he must stand to the model...he he..that' my 2 cents..I don't find any reason for a fast short focal length lens (even prime)..Haiz.but if you have money just buy lor..try and tell us the new lens 10-24 f2.8..I know Canon has the technologies to do a lot of impossible thing but to me..it's not my cup of tea..not for my shooting style..
    thanks for answering the doubt. i have been wondering if the lack of such lens could be due to technical difficulties in achieving acceptable lens quality with large glass needed for large aperture, at such extreme focal length and zoom range, or could it be technically impossible due to the rear focal distance.

    yes, being a newbie using a nikon entry level DSLR and none others before means that i dun really follow up on lens from other mounts, and as such did not know of the fast ultra wide lens from olympus and canon. i suppose that the olympus conversion factor of 2 is basically an issue of the camera body that does not interfere directly with the fast ultra wide nature of the olympus lens mentioned, that is assuming if this lens can be mounted on other body of a lower conversion factor.

    and regarding the question why i ask this question in any practical concerns. i have the bad habit of shooting wide angles street photography at low light night condition without flash and tripod.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    I doubt anyone can handheld for a few seconds to shoot sharp night shots bah...

  15. #15
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by Youhong View Post
    I doubt anyone can handheld for a few seconds to shoot sharp night shots bah...
    yup, in no condition have i been successful for shots slower than 1/4sec. hence i frame brighter composition, and rely on non tripod means of support. however, that is at the edge of inconsistent production and i'm looking forward to better ISO-to-noise control, better VR and larger aperture in future....
    Last edited by zoossh; 30th January 2007 at 09:22 PM.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    289

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by Clockunder View Post
    So the questions are

    1) Is the technologically possible to produce for e.g. 10mm F/2 lens?
    Smallness may not be a problem because 10mm F/3.5 is even smaller. So are there any technical issues which make it impossible? Distortions? Extreme softness at wide open?

    Only engineers can answer these physics questions. May be some experts can shed some light on the above.

    2) Is there demand for lens like 10mm F/2?

    a) what is it suitable for, considering the shallow Depth of Field and picture quality (distortion, sharpness and other technical issues above) at wide open ?

    Yes, it is not necessarily for landscape only. It can be used for many other types of situation.

    As for DOF, it can be quite shallow even at this short focal length when it's wide open and the focal point is quite near. e.g. 10mm @F/2, subject distance 1 metre, the DOF on a APS-C sized sensor DSLR Canon 30D would be

    DOF (near) = 0.73m
    DOF (far) = 1.6m
    Total DOF = 1.6 - 0.73 = 0.87m
    DOF (infront subject) = 0.27m
    DOF (behind subject) = 0.60m

    b) Cost
    Related to technical difficulties as well as production economies of scale.
    The more difficult such lens can be produced, the more costly.

    The more demand there is, the more production there will be and this can lower down the average production and marketing cost per lens. To a certain extent, Cost and demand is a chicken and egg situation.

    I have only questions but no answers.
    May I try to attemp your question although I'm not an expert..

    1) Is the technologically possible to produce for e.g. 10mm F/2 lens

    Ideally everything is a doable..but when you go to production, yeah..every issue has its own problems. Engineers always solve a problem by convert it into another problem.

    Technical scale views:

    As I mentioned above, at 10mm focal length, a group of lenses should be super curved or they use high index material (artifical flourite crystalline is an example) the image area is small. Fabricating super-convected lenses plus large area of image is a challence for optic engineer plus manufacturing engineer plus materials engineer plus optical testing engineer plus huge amount of investment to fabricate it. Er..

    a) The optical enigneer design on computer the lense with super convected lenses,easy mah..use computer CAD.

    b) The material engineer make sure the artificial flourite is decent optical properties no defect in the designed shape..Ha difficult liao...crystal growth of flourite is easy but make sure it 100% no defect well shaped, difficult lor..must control very very well..

    c) Manufacturing engineer: This CaF2 crystalline material is highly susceptible to mechanical and thermal shock, resulting in fracturing.Plus its naturally hard and brittle it's hard to make..but still a doable with just extremely high controled process

    d)test engineer:throw away all the not lousy lenses..Calculate the yield..er..

    good crystalline pieces are used for L lenses, the lousier crystalline and optical properties are used for non-L lenses with the larger specs..Then the glass are assembled in may be other contries to reduce the cost..

    Non-technical view (more likely be the drive factor)

    OT abit: Marketing:how much the demand for this lens, how much it cost if release,...Oh yeah..must tell you something I learn when I work with Canon people. They say the cost to make a product may be less than 1/3 of actual price..But because of distribution cost , after sale service cost (warranty..blah blah...) commission for saler,retailer everything goes up..But all commercial product over the world are like that from small toy to car....nah nah...blah blah..

    The rest question like demand for lens you should ask people here. Just me I dont use short focal lenses for portrait..ExploerZ has mentioned about street shooting..ha ha..of course if he wants lah..just that in sale man point of view, we care how many lenses can sell, how much do we get profit..Actually that's the main drive factor: Customer demands..if there is, Canon engineers for sure can make it,only how much does it cost, of course final price factor need to be considered.

    Canon has the technologies to do much much more complicated and difficult products compared to these simple lenses fabrication. (in term of a technologies large scale view).I believe if you want, you pay them well enough they will do for you..
    A person is useless unless he is standing up for himself, for his future, and for his dreams.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    289

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by zoossh View Post
    thanks for answering the doubt. i have been wondering if the lack of such lens could be due to technical difficulties in achieving acceptable lens quality with large glass needed for large aperture, at such extreme focal length and zoom range, or could it be technically impossible due to the rear focal distance.

    yes, being a newbie using a nikon entry level DSLR and none others before means that i dun really follow up on lens from other mounts, and as such did not know of the fast ultra wide lens from olympus and canon. i suppose that the olympus conversion factor of 2 is basically an issue of the camera body that does not interfere directly with the fast ultra wide nature of the olympus lens mentioned, that is assuming if this lens can be mounted on other body of a lower conversion factor.

    and regarding the question why i ask this question in any practical concerns. i have the bad habit of shooting wide angles street photography at low light night condition without flash and tripod.
    Oi, brother........you are considered a new bie meh??????I doubt on that..Sorry me..I only know about Canon stuff (lazy to learn other not familar things..) ..i only know technical issues but idiot in photography..

    Er...theoritically, we can use super high ISO for night street shoot to compensate for the small aperture...but when they use high ISO ,the sensor actually pumps higher current for the detectors (photo current) to "detect" more signal..but then the high current results in high noise. These photography stuff you know much better than me ...

    They need to work on the sensors and noise reduction algorithms..In future they might come out something like ISO 6400 or more with super low-noise body..ha ha..then you can happily shoot liao..
    A person is useless unless he is standing up for himself, for his future, and for his dreams.

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by standingup View Post
    Oi, brother........you are considered a new bie meh??????I doubt on that..Sorry me..I only know about Canon stuff (lazy to learn other not familar things..) ..i only know technical issues but idiot in photography..

    Er...theoritically, we can use super high ISO for night street shoot to compensate for the small aperture...but when they use high ISO ,the sensor actually pumps higher current for the detectors (photo current) to "detect" more signal..but then the high current results in high noise. These photography stuff you know much better than me ...

    They need to work on the sensors and noise reduction algorithms..In future they might come out something like ISO 6400 or more with super low-noise body..ha ha..then you can happily shoot liao..
    haiz... by that time i don think photography would be that fun liao...

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    289

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    why ah?i thought customers want it?.low noise high ISO..sorry..my stupid question ..
    A person is useless unless he is standing up for himself, for his future, and for his dreams.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Ultra wide zooms doesn't match a fast large aperture?

    Quote Originally Posted by standingup View Post
    May I try to attemp your question although I'm not an expert..

    1) Is the technologically possible to produce for e.g. 10mm F/2 lens

    Ideally everything is a doable..but when you go to production, yeah..every issue has its own problems. Engineers always solve a problem by convert it into another problem.

    Technical scale views:

    As I mentioned above, at 10mm focal length, a group of lenses should be super curved or they use high index material (artifical flourite crystalline is an example) the image area is small. Fabricating super-convected lenses plus large area of image is a challence for optic engineer plus manufacturing engineer plus materials engineer plus optical testing engineer plus huge amount of investment to fabricate it. Er..

    a) The optical enigneer design on computer the lense with super convected lenses,easy mah..use computer CAD.

    b) The material engineer make sure the artificial flourite is decent optical properties no defect in the designed shape..Ha difficult liao...crystal growth of flourite is easy but make sure it 100% no defect well shaped, difficult lor..must control very very well..

    c) Manufacturing engineer: This CaF2 crystalline material is highly susceptible to mechanical and thermal shock, resulting in fracturing.Plus its naturally hard and brittle it's hard to make..but still a doable with just extremely high controled process

    d)test engineer:throw away all the not lousy lenses..Calculate the yield..er..

    good crystalline pieces are used for L lenses, the lousier crystalline and optical properties are used for non-L lenses with the larger specs..Then the glass are assembled in may be other contries to reduce the cost..

    Non-technical view (more likely be the drive factor)

    OT abit: Marketing:how much the demand for this lens, how much it cost if release,...Oh yeah..must tell you something I learn when I work with Canon people. They say the cost to make a product may be less than 1/3 of actual price..But because of distribution cost , after sale service cost (warranty..blah blah...) commission for saler,retailer everything goes up..But all commercial product over the world are like that from small toy to car....nah nah...blah blah..

    The rest question like demand for lens you should ask people here. Just me I dont use short focal lenses for portrait..ExploerZ has mentioned about street shooting..ha ha..of course if he wants lah..just that in sale man point of view, we care how many lenses can sell, how much do we get profit..Actually that's the main drive factor: Customer demands..if there is, Canon engineers for sure can make it,only how much does it cost, of course final price factor need to be considered.

    Canon has the technologies to do much much more complicated and difficult products compared to these simple lenses fabrication. (in term of a technologies large scale view).I believe if you want, you pay them well enough they will do for you..
    Yes, I'm aware of the much higher difficulties in producing ultrawide lenses (of all apertures due to their short focal lengths) as well as long telezoom lenses with wide aperture.

    So my question was : which one is more difficult to produce : 10mm F/2 or 10mm F/3.5 (available)?

    If there is low need to use ultra lenses at very big apertures, there won't be economies of scale and these lenses may cost $50K each after taking into account the R&D, production and marketing (including distribution cost).

    Custom made? That would cost over a few hundred $K each.
    Last edited by Clockunder; 31st January 2007 at 12:52 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •