any difference btw MF lens and 35mm Lens?


Status
Not open for further replies.
Aug 8, 2002
312
0
16
42
Visit site
#1
have anyone try shoot 35mm film in MF camera or using MF lenses on 35mm body (like Contax)?

Any difference in quality?
 

YSLee

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
2,326
1
38
Visit site
#2
MF lenses are design to cover a larger area (duh). As for the differences, I wouldn't know, but I guess it'll be like the same as with any piece of equipment.. There'll be the really good ones, and the really shite ones.
 

roti

New Member
Sep 24, 2002
659
0
0
Sgp/China/TW
Visit site
#3
i have try the pentax 645 lenses on the 135mm pentax Z series cameras not much diff ....only the weight la...
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#4
There are differences. Design priorities are different when you are designing lenses for larger formats. A quick dig around the web should yield a few answers.
 

sriram

New Member
Mar 10, 2002
1,253
0
0
#5
Technically, MF lenses can be manufactured to deliver lower resolution compared to equivalent 35mm lenses since they project an image on to a much larger area of film. Hence... they can record more overall detail even though they are usually not as good as 35mm lenses when you compare 1 sq-cm of a MF neg to a 35mm neg.

If you're talking MTF, highly regarded 35mm lenses (primes, macro lenses, etc) usually rate as high as 4.6-4.8 but MF lenses typically rate around 3.2-3.8. Yet, they deliver the goods (better than 35mm) due to the large film size.

This is one reason why you can get cheap large format lenses for a couple of hundred dollars which can squish any 35mm outfit with your expensive 2000 dollar lens.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom