Where's the sweet spot?

Frank Granovski · May 16th, 2004, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Schneider and Zeiss glass

Zeiss glass comes from Schneider, but more Zeiss glass comes from Japan...unless things have changed again. I had a Yashica FR, and found the Yashica 50mm F1.4 sharper at F1.4 than the Contax Zeiss 50mm F.14, at F1.4. The Contax Zeiss fit on the Yashica FR since Contax made the Contax's and decided keep the same mount.

Quote:

(if) you can find your sweet spot. since the lens of the GS400 will be whole new story

With the MX300? I'll work on that but it will be subjective. (The MX300 also has a 12X zoom / F1.6.)

Frank Granovski · May 16th, 2004, 01:05 AM

Quote:

I've own my share of Lecia's over the years....

What film still cam did you like best? It doesn't have to be a Leica, since you mention you owned a slew of makes and models.

My first cam was a Kodak. I was about 6 or younger when I got it.

Justin Boyle · May 16th, 2004, 04:17 AM

sorry jeff but i don't agree with you there. i believe that leica does design the lenses. The cost of a good quality leica lens would come when the manufacture the lenses. i would say that they would design the lenses (R&D cost) but they are probably made in japan or some asian country where it is cheaper. We've already talked about video lenses and have already come to the conclusion that they wont be as good as 35mm lenses but at the resolution that our cams take it doesn' matter a lot. If they are using aspheric lenses then there shouldn't be any barrel distortion. i just hope that they aren't using the plastic lenses. either way i am not dissapointed with my mx-500 at all and the only draw back are the low light problems.

Justin

Frank Granovski · May 16th, 2004, 05:16 AM

That's a good point concerning plastic lenses. I keep reading about that they are used in consumer cams---but which ones? Perhaps they're only in puffed plastic cams? Seriously, I would like to know which cams use plastic lenses---not that I think they are no good, but certainly not as good as high quality glass I would think.

Justin Boyle · May 16th, 2004, 07:03 AM

I definately don't like the idea of plastic lenses. i think probably the worst thing with them is they do restrict light. i think though that this is not the biggest problem for the mx-500 concerning low light./ i do believe the problem is the ccds. The fact of the matter is that i am happy about my pana at the moment and no matter what anyone tells me the footage wont change and neither will my opinion of the footage if someone tells me that the lens is rubbish or similar. I would however worry if the outer element was plastic of course i would just take more precautions. either way i don't care about the technology of any cam as long as it takes good pictures and at the end of the day i think mine does.

Justin

Kamal Tailor · May 16th, 2004, 07:41 AM

hmmmm i'm just waiting for them to make futher developments in producing Carbon glass(diamond) as opposed to silica glass, it's most likely to be purer than silica glass, and a hell of a lot lighter and scratch resistant

they've already found away to make Diamond Wafers for IC's instead of using silica wafers, and the method they use apparently allows them to make diamond glass in what ever shape and size they need =)

Diamond glass, Yeah baby YEAH!!

George Beck · May 16th, 2004, 10:09 AM

lets come back to the sweet spot =)

to use tha tables correctly we need to have the correct info in the spread-sheet.

1) film resolution (l/mm) = 80

147 This is for Velvia. Velvia resolves 80 l/mm at contrast 1.6, 160 l/mm at contrast 1000. I logarithmically interpolated the l/mm at contrast 30 because my USAF resolving power chart shows this contrast.

since we will be using CCD, how much should be this value? someone said that it's 30, but to give the best imageshould be at least 90?
what do you think?

2) lens base resolution (l/mm) (for model 1)= 80

A reasonable default value, for the center of the lens' image circle.

Shouldn't this value be higher?

3) diffraction constant 1500 Used to characterize diffraction as a function of fstop.

I have no idea about this one =/

those two that follow should be the same?
4)lens aberration base (l/mm) (for model 3) 50 Used in a heuristic formula for lens aberrations.

5)lens aberration factor (for model 3) 3.5 Used in a heuristic formula for lens aberrations.

Jeff Donald · May 16th, 2004, 06:19 PM

Quote:

What film still cam did you like best? It doesn't have to be a Leica, since you mention you owned a slew of makes and models.

Wow, tough question. I really liked the Pentax LX I had with a sports finder. The Leica M3 double stroke was a cool camera. I liked my OM 2, 2n, 3 and 4 a whole lot. My first camera was an OM 1. I had a Makina Plaubel 67 with a Nikkor 80mm lens and it quite possibly took the sharpest pictures. But i would have to say my all-time favorite camera was the Leica M5. I have rather large hands and it is larger than the M3. The viewfinder is brighter and has better bright frames. It was built like a tank and had many innovative features.

Frank Granovski · May 16th, 2004, 06:28 PM

D_mn. Most of those are my favourites as well.

Which OM do you like best. I'm thinking of buying an OM4 as a 2nd cam, and maybe selling my FM2T and also going with a F5. (Leica's too pricey for me, especially the lenses.)

Do you like mechanical shutters?

Did you have a Rapid Winder for your M3. The guy who makes them is a friend of mine. He just lives 3 blocks down the hill from me.

Jeff Donald · May 16th, 2004, 07:06 PM

No, but a winder would have been nice. I'm not sure it would have worked with the double stroke model. I had two F5's but I didn't like them, they were too big and heavy. I shot more with my N90 than either F5. The F5 anniversary is a cool camera though.

I was heavy into the OM series for about 10 years or so. I prefer TTL flash, so the OM 3 would not be my favorite user camera. My favorite user OM camera would have to be the Black OM 4. I had both the Black and Ti versions and I didn't care for the champagne color of the titanium.

I like mechanical shutters, but I need TTL flash for the fill flash work I do. Unfortunately mechanical shutters don't work with TTL flash. Oh well, can't win them all.

Frank Granovski · May 16th, 2004, 07:12 PM

Exactly. I never seem to be satisfied when it comes to still cams, and there never seems to be that perfect one. Thank goodness we have Panasonic video cams. :-))

May 16th, 2004, 04:17 AM	#18
Justin Boyle Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 207	sorry jeff but i don't agree with you there. i believe that leica does design the lenses. The cost of a good quality leica lens would come when the manufacture the lenses. i would say that they would design the lenses (R&D cost) but they are probably made in japan or some asian country where it is cheaper. We've already talked about video lenses and have already come to the conclusion that they wont be as good as 35mm lenses but at the resolution that our cams take it doesn' matter a lot. If they are using aspheric lenses then there shouldn't be any barrel distortion. i just hope that they aren't using the plastic lenses. either way i am not dissapointed with my mx-500 at all and the only draw back are the low light problems. Justin __________________ jlboyle

May 16th, 2004, 07:03 AM	#20
Justin Boyle Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 207	I definately don't like the idea of plastic lenses. i think probably the worst thing with them is they do restrict light. i think though that this is not the biggest problem for the mx-500 concerning low light./ i do believe the problem is the ccds. The fact of the matter is that i am happy about my pana at the moment and no matter what anyone tells me the footage wont change and neither will my opinion of the footage if someone tells me that the lens is rubbish or similar. I would however worry if the outer element was plastic of course i would just take more precautions. either way i don't care about the technology of any cam as long as it takes good pictures and at the end of the day i think mine does. Justin __________________ jlboyle

May 16th, 2004, 07:06 PM	#25
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	No, but a winder would have been nice. I'm not sure it would have worked with the double stroke model. I had two F5's but I didn't like them, they were too big and heavy. I shot more with my N90 than either F5. The F5 anniversary is a cool camera though. I was heavy into the OM series for about 10 years or so. I prefer TTL flash, so the OM 3 would not be my favorite user camera. My favorite user OM camera would have to be the Black OM 4. I had both the Black and Ti versions and I didn't care for the champagne color of the titanium. I like mechanical shutters, but I need TTL flash for the fill flash work I do. Unfortunately mechanical shutters don't work with TTL flash. Oh well, can't win them all. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

May 16th, 2004, 05:16 AM	#19
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	That's a good point concerning plastic lenses. I keep reading about that they are used in consumer cams---but which ones? Perhaps they're only in puffed plastic cams? Seriously, I would like to know which cams use plastic lenses---not that I think they are no good, but certainly not as good as high quality glass I would think.

May 16th, 2004, 07:41 AM	#21
Kamal Tailor Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Australia, Victoria, Melbourne Posts: 65	hmmmm i'm just waiting for them to make futher developments in producing Carbon glass(diamond) as opposed to silica glass, it's most likely to be purer than silica glass, and a hell of a lot lighter and scratch resistant they've already found away to make Diamond Wafers for IC's instead of using silica wafers, and the method they use apparently allows them to make diamond glass in what ever shape and size they need =) Diamond glass, Yeah baby YEAH!!

May 16th, 2004, 10:09 AM	#22
George Beck Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 244	lets come back to the sweet spot =) to use tha tables correctly we need to have the correct info in the spread-sheet. 1) film resolution (l/mm) = 80 147 This is for Velvia. Velvia resolves 80 l/mm at contrast 1.6, 160 l/mm at contrast 1000. I logarithmically interpolated the l/mm at contrast 30 because my USAF resolving power chart shows this contrast. since we will be using CCD, how much should be this value? someone said that it's 30, but to give the best imageshould be at least 90? what do you think? 2) lens base resolution (l/mm) (for model 1)= 80 A reasonable default value, for the center of the lens' image circle. Shouldn't this value be higher? 3) diffraction constant 1500 Used to characterize diffraction as a function of fstop. I have no idea about this one =/ those two that follow should be the same? 4)lens aberration base (l/mm) (for model 3) 50 Used in a heuristic formula for lens aberrations. 5)lens aberration factor (for model 3) 3.5 Used in a heuristic formula for lens aberrations.

May 16th, 2004, 06:28 PM	#24
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	D_mn. Most of those are my favourites as well. Which OM do you like best. I'm thinking of buying an OM4 as a 2nd cam, and maybe selling my FM2T and also going with a F5. (Leica's too pricey for me, especially the lenses.) Do you like mechanical shutters? Did you have a Rapid Winder for your M3. The guy who makes them is a friend of mine. He just lives 3 blocks down the hill from me.

May 16th, 2004, 07:12 PM	#26
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Exactly. I never seem to be satisfied when it comes to still cams, and there never seems to be that perfect one. Thank goodness we have Panasonic video cams. :-))