[LRflex] Re: OT: There Is No Free Lunch, Episode 763: Lens Adapters

  • From: David Young <dsy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:07:40 -0700

Richard:

I have to agree with Dr. Ted.  The writings of this chap (yes, I read it all) 
may be accurate, but they are irrelevant.  As Frank pointed out, 10 microns is 
finer than the lens mount tolerance on any commercially made camera, be it 
Leica, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Zeiss, Alpa, etc., etc., etc.

The man was looking for  a problem; and he found it. Whoopee. 

In the real world, I have used adapters for years ... and sold countless 
thousands of dollars worth of photos taken with them.

Forget the numbers.  Let's see his photography, and see if he can show us just 
where these images fall apart.

After all, by his logic, using a 1.4x or 2x extender on, say, a Leica R or 
Nikon, or Canon (assuming extender brand & lens & camera all match) is enough 
to make the combination unusable.  The real world, as proven by countless 
thousands of photographers, says that's bunk.

And that's my opinion of those who pixel-peep - especially those who peep in 
the extreme, as this chap does.

David.

............................................

> If I remember previous writings by Roger & tests run by Digilloyd site
> correctly the field relevance of this 10microns number is contingent
> upon the imaging quality of the lens being evaluated, what type of lens
> it is, and -very importantly- how small the photosites are in the sensor
> of the camera. Sensor being a key word here because It wasn't nearly
> such an issue when the "sensor" was film because film reacts to light in
> a slice of space much thicker and more forgiving than the dead flat
> plane of photosites in an imaging sensor. 
>
>
> Wish I could recall the exact Mu value for tha photosite that's needed
> and which lenses, but should be easy to track down.
>
>
> For my own purposes using R mount adapters on an 8.3mp 1.3x Camera, I
> haven't had any field relevant issues i've found during my pixel peeping
> image eval habits. (The blessing & curse of 24" monitors!)
>
>
> So field relevance is pretty subjective, your mileage may vary, not
> valid in california, and LSMFT!
>
>
> R.W.
>
> __________________________________________
>
>
> " It's never too late to realize how stupid you are."                    
>                                           - W. Corso  
> __________________________________________
>
>
> On Sep 27, 2013, at 1:39 PM, Frank Filippone <red735i@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>> 10microns is really small. Ten millionths of an inch. Most likely
>> smaller than the machining tolerance of a really good production
>> process. 
>> I wonder if this result has more than theoretical effect on actual
>> imaging systems?
>>
>> Frank Filippone
>>
>> On Sep 27, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Richard Ward
>> <ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi Flexers,
>>> Roger Cicala has been playing with his new "toys" eg: Optical Test
>>> Bench. The readers digest version of his latest blog post is an
>>> attempt to please local bean counters wasn't very pleasing at all.
>>> ie: never a free lunch.
>>> RLW
>>> http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-
>>> episode-763-lens-adapters
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>> " It's never too late to realize how stupid you are."                
>>>                                               - W. Corso  
>>> __________________________________________
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
   http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
    //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. leicareflex
  3. Archive
  4. 09-2013