The death of the 35mm Adapter?

Dan Diaconu · November 24th, 2005, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith Wakeham

Maybe 2/3" will become the standard

Doubt it! (you just forgot your wonderful reasoning above)

Quote:

Faster lenses plus 2/3" could replace 35mm adapters

Doubt it! Faster lenses?
There is a 1.0/50mm lens out there RIGHT NOW! Noctilux. A beauty!$ US 3.500!
How many here have that lens? huh? I wanna see some hands. How many professional photographers have it? How many line up to 1.4/50 and PAY the $50-150 required? MANY! Than.. why bother? For one or two lunatics in one thousand? (Noctilux-lunatics....arghh)
1 slice/$1 is the winner! Hyundai not Rolls. Those are the real winners (imo) not Dalsa. (if I could walk my talk for one day only, you would have a bit less to read; woudn't that be nice?)

Frank Vrionis · November 24th, 2005, 05:57 PM

Keith i agree that building an adapter into the camera would be a wise and cost effective way to achieve a 35mm 'look'. can these companies think outside the square?...I suppose your '10 year' prediction gives them enough time.

Nick Hiltgen wrote: "Frank by 24 frames a second do you mean stop motion? because otherwise this camera only does 3 (unless you're talking about the 20D which does 5)"

Nick, I know how many frames it does. I'm hoping you are being tongue in cheek cos if you read my post properly i mentioned that ...."if it can do 24 frames per second (we'll get there) then we're in business."

...IF and when. Just think that HD was astronomically expensive but 2-3 years ago...let along 10 years. where are we now? HD is everywhere and growing. plus there's all these home projects brewing that 'seem' high quality for cheap. it seems ridiculous to think that large multinationals cannot produce a large sensor that keeps its cool fo cheap.

what is holding back everyone is storage. if they can overcome storage they don't have to think about limited codecs (let alone tapes!).

check this out:
http://www.computerworld.com/hardwar...106288,00.html

November 24th, 2005, 05:57 PM	#17
Frank Vrionis Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93	Keith i agree that building an adapter into the camera would be a wise and cost effective way to achieve a 35mm 'look'. can these companies think outside the square?...I suppose your '10 year' prediction gives them enough time. Nick Hiltgen wrote: "Frank by 24 frames a second do you mean stop motion? because otherwise this camera only does 3 (unless you're talking about the 20D which does 5)" Nick, I know how many frames it does. I'm hoping you are being tongue in cheek cos if you read my post properly i mentioned that ...."if it can do 24 frames per second (we'll get there) then we're in business." ...IF and when. Just think that HD was astronomically expensive but 2-3 years ago...let along 10 years. where are we now? HD is everywhere and growing. plus there's all these home projects brewing that 'seem' high quality for cheap. it seems ridiculous to think that large multinationals cannot produce a large sensor that keeps its cool fo cheap. what is holding back everyone is storage. if they can overcome storage they don't have to think about limited codecs (let alone tapes!). check this out: http://www.computerworld.com/hardwar...106288,00.html