Will u still be buying non-digital lenses?

[lsisaxon]

How I wish there are more people like you so that I don't have headaches looking for a particular film I wanted. Because of this 'digital revolution', we, 'the analog dinosaurs', have to make changes to the way we take photographs.

Yeah.. using Lightroom instead of the traditional darkroom huh?

 

[Rashkae]

All i can say is that my 20-year-old beercan lens, designed for film, works wonderfully on my A100. So really, I don't think there's such a thing as a "digital lens".

 

[theRBK]

All i can say is that my 20-year-old beercan lens, designed for film, works wonderfully on my A100. So really, I don't think there's such a thing as a "digital lens".

if you refer to my earlier post http://forums.clubsnap.org/showpost.php?p=2768641&postcount=27 there is such a thing called a digital lens...its just that its been distorted by the marketing departments of the lens companies...film lenses do work fine with DSLRs to an extent but there are issues that a digital lens can address

 

[Artosoft]

if you refer to my earlier post http://forums.clubsnap.org/showpost.php?p=2768641&postcount=27 there is such a thing called a digital lens...its just that its been distorted by the marketing departments of the lens companies...film lenses do work fine with DSLRs to an extent but there are issues that a digital lens can address

For example: something like special coating on "digital lenses" to prevent/reduce reflection from the sensor (with its filter).

Regards,
Arto.

 

[espion]

Some info on what a "digital lens" is all about.

You decide if it is something significant or not.

 

[Deadpoet]

Some info on what a "digital lens" is all about.

You decide if it is something significant or not.

This is a marketting piece from Olympus, of course, they will advocate the 4/3 system.

 

[theRBK]

came across this FAQ from a very knowledgeable guy (if you have come across his posts in dpreview forum) about digital lenses:

http://www.swissarmyfork.com/digital_lens_faq.htm

it's not very up to date but the info is still pretty relevant

 

[diediealsomustdive]

came across this FAQ from a very knowledgeable guy (if you have come across his posts in dpreview forum) about digital lenses:

http://www.swissarmyfork.com/digital_lens_faq.htm

it's not very up to date but the info is still pretty relevant

Probably the most informative and neutral write-up I've seen. Still, the only relevant parts are the "longer throw"/perpendicular, and chromatic abberation. CA part has been an age old problem and has been addressed in recent times with the LD/ED/SLD/Apsherical what-not type of lenses. The longer throw is therefore the real remaining frontier, and my earlier guess of the lens companies addressing this by making lenses with "longer throw" is correct.

Reduced coverage is really an artifact of the cost of sensor for FF, and DX/EF-S/DC/Di whatever are not good definition of digital lenses.

Maybe in time to come when the resolution of sensors have gone to 20+ Megapixel and FF, I hazard to guess that the short comings of analog lenses would be shown. And if the author is correct, only WA are affected.

 

[theRBK]

Probably the most informative and neutral write-up I've seen. Still, the only relevant parts are the "longer throw"/perpendicular, and chromatic abberation. CA part has been an age old problem and has been addressed in recent times with the LD/ED/SLD/Apsherical what-not type of lenses. The longer throw is therefore the real remaining frontier, and my earlier guess of the lens companies addressing this by making lenses with "longer throw" is correct.

Reduced coverage is really an artifact of the cost of sensor for FF, and DX/EF-S/DC/Di whatever are not good definition of digital lenses.

Maybe in time to come when the resolution of sensors have gone to 20+ Megapixel and FF, I hazard to guess that the short comings of analog lenses would be shown. And if the author is correct, only WA are affected.

yeah, he's writing is usually very level headed and informative :thumbsup:

like I suggested, there might come a time when FF 35mm might get its own digital lenses (large format certainly has with Rodenstock and Schneider-Kreuznach digital lenses)...and as the article suggests, Nikons 17-35 might be an unannounced first step...and unless mass expectations are wrong, FF 20+ Mpixels is probably months away...

 

[synapseman]

I'm still buying "non-digital" lenses because they are cheap, and provide full-frame coverage, which might be useful should I ever be able to afford it.