[LRflex] Re: Optimal Focal Lengths ... for Dave Simms
- From: "Aram Langhans" <leica_r8@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:05:28 -0700
Only one 80-200 that I know of. I have often been tempted, except for the
weigh. It would compliment my 35-70 quite nicely. Who would ever miss 10
mm of focal length in that area? I also have waited to see what Leica comes
up with for us orphaned R users. Since my Rebel is still functioning, I
have not had the need of a new camera, yet, though the 7D looks tempting for
the nice viewfinder. If the Rebel lasts as long as it takes for Leica to
either put up (acceptable solution) or shut-up (There Will Be NO R solution
EVER!), then I will be in the mood for making up my mind as to what system I
want to go to the grave with. Best guess if the former, Nikon, and convert
Leica R glass to fit.
Aram
--------------------------------------------------
From: "David Scollard" <publisher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 12:50 PM
To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [LRflex] Re: Optimal Focal Lengths ... for Dave Simms
> That's really quite a mouth-watering description of the 80-200, and has
> started me thinking that maybe I can't survive much longer without getting
> one of these fellahs for myself. Some questions: are there variants, with
> different levels of performance? I made a quick survey of some of the used
> dealers I've dealt with; KEH has nothing, Igor's Camera Exchange has a
> Vario-ELmar 75-200 f4.5 for $245 (their rating is Excellent) -- but given
> your caveat about the Minolta-designed versions having lower performance
> levels, it seems important to get just the right model. Any advice?
> Cheers, David Scollard
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Young" <dsy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 9:28 AM
> Subject: [LRflex] Optimal Focal Lengths ... for Dave Simms
>
>
> Good Morning, Dave!
>
> You wrote:
>
>>According to the tests and commentaries, it's hard to find a Leica zoom
>>that
>>isn't the equal of a prime lens.
>
> This may be true of the current crop, but certainly not of the
> earlier, Minolta designed, Leica Zooms.
>
>>I sometimes wonder whether, when a manufacturer
>>is locked into producing,say, a 50mm lens because it is deemed to have a
>>"normal" perspective, that they don't handicap themselves.
>>What I'm thinking is that, when all the calculations have been done,
>>a 44.3 mm
>>lens may end up being optimal, or, a 31.2mm for example. In other
>>words, there
>>must be particular focal lengths that are optimal, in terms of design
>>parameters, whereas it's a struggle to produce the "standard" focal
>>lengths.
>>Hence, when stacked against this inherent uphill battle, it may be able to
>>produce a relatively good zoom which may never improve upon "optimal"
>>focal
>>lengths but which knocks the hell out of the standard ones.
>
> Back in 2006, I had a discussion with Peter Karbe, head of the
> optical dept, at Leica. He told me that there are two factors at
> play, when it comes to lens design... the designer's skill and the
> company's money.
>
> Although modern computerized ray-tracing and related software really
> speeds up the optical design process, it does not replace the
> brilliance (or lack thereof) of both the optical and mechanical
> designers. The designer can simply try different lens shapes and
> glass types much faster. As well, some glass types can cost a
> thousand Euros per kilo, while basic optical (flint) glass may be as
> low as 10 to 15 Euros/kilo. So while some designers may be free to
> use the best glass for the purpose, most often the Sales department
> puts restrictions on what can be used by limiting the cost of
> production before design is even started!
>
> Then there is the complexity of the mechanical design.... in
> virtually all zooms, different internal "blocks" of elements move at
> different rates, and different distances, not to mention different
> directions, to achieve optimal performance. Here again, having more
> groups that move independently may well improve performance, but it
> also makes the lenses much more complex (read: expensive) to
> manufacture. So, once again, the Sales department is often an
> impediment to the design.
>
> So, you see, it has little to do with "optimal focal lengths", and
> much more to do with final production costs.
>
> Because prime lenses are far simpler, mechanically, at any given
> price point, any firm can put more into the design, as the mechanical
> construction portion of the final price is quite low. Besides, a
> good prime lens may have only 5 to 8 elements. Fewer elements means
> not only fewer reflections and other internal problems, but also
> lower costs, as you simply make fewer pieces! Here, performance for
> the dollar is generally highest.
>
> Zoom lenses often have between 12 and 18 elements... add in the more
> complex mechanical movements and you can see where/how costs rise.
>
> Thus, to keep retail prices "reasonable", most makers limit
> manufacturing costs before design begins. Ergo, very few zooms equal
> the performance of top notch primes.
>
> I think Leica zooms do better simply because of the price range they
> are in. Leica allows more to work with. As well, Leica design their
> lenses for top-notch performance, and only after the design is done,
> do they evaluate whether they can afford to produce it. I was told
> that there are many designs which never see "the light of day", for
> even Leica cannot afford to produce them at a sellable price!
>
> And I'll still put my 80-200/f4 up against any prime, from any
> maker. Something that can be said of very few zoom lenses.
>
> Cheers!
>
> -------------
> David Young - Photographer
> Logan Lake, BC, Canada
>
> Wildlife & Sports: www.furnfeather.net
> Personal pages: www.main.furnfeather.net
> A micro-lender through KIVA.org.
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
