Re: benefit of digital camera (lense quality)

From: Tom Ferguson ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 04/15/04-12:50:26 PM Z
Message-id: <>

Hello Henk, I was explaining "why" some lenses are better, I was not
disagreeing with you :-)

Many existing 35mm lenses are quite good with DSLRs. Some are not. I
suspect we will see more and better lenses for digital soon. In fact it
has already started. Look at Tamron marketing the DI lens line , Nikon
marketing DX lenses, and Sigma with their DC line. Also the whole new
4/3 standard systems.

You can do very good work with existing film camera lenses, you just
have to test or research first. You can't assume a great film lens is a
great digital lens.

DPreview is a great site for info and discussions on digital cameras:

On Thursday, April 15, 2004, at 09:23 AM, henk thijs wrote:

> Tom wrote:
> Most if not all digital sensors have millions of tiny (very very tiny)
> lenses built into the chip. Your image gets collected by the camera
> lens and sent to the "film/sensor" plane, then it goes through the
> chip lenses into the chip sensors. Yes, this has something to do with
> your question.
> Dear Tom....I would say you are talking about the  treatment of the
> info after passing the lense. Isn't the the whole chain of quality
> items of interest for the final result?
> These chip lenses work best with light hitting them reasonably
> straight on. Too oblique an angle and your resolution goes down.
> So, for digital (not film), the exit pupil of a lens is a major
> consideration. This is most true for wide angle lenses. Often a great
> film lens is a mediocre digital lens, and a mediocre film lens can be
> a great dig lens. many folks love the Sigma wide angle zooms on
> digital cameras. No-one would suggest that Sigma makes Leica quality
> glass (or even Nikon or Canon quality glass). But through luck or
> forward looking design, their wide angle glass has bigger exit pupils
> than normal.
> But...isn't this the point I want to make: special designed lenses for
> dig. would be a pre for the quality of the dig. camera?? Especially
> the expensive DSLR with the promise of the possibilty of using your
> 'old' lenses is not the way to go for top-quality, or??
> Many (not all) of the "all in one" digital cameras have been designed
> with this in mind. My Sony F707 with it's  Zeiss zoom is amazingly
> sharp. If sharp was the only criterial for a great camera I would
> never have moved on to a DSLR!
> No, not only 'sharp' is the criteria of a lense.
> Now, I just want to see one member of your group use "F/68" on a DSLR
> :-)
> F68 stands for Fotogroup 1968, see the web-site  :-)
> Thanks for the info, I did not know the fact of the millions of very,
> very tiny lenses built into the chip. And, after all : even with
> digital it is the image in itself that counts.
> Cheers,
> Henk
> --
> -----------------------------------------
> H e n k   T h i j s  -  P h o t o g r a p h y
> photography
> member of F68
> -----------------------------------------------------------
Tom Ferguson
Received on Thu Apr 15 12:51:13 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 05/14/04-02:14:31 PM Z CST