frezeiss wrote:
Ron, any updates about MF ability on the X-PRO1? I hear that is has an EVF but dont no the rest. Thanks
I haven't seen one in person yet, so am just going by what has been posted on various links. So far it would seem the Zack Arias blog has the best hands-on results so far: http://zackarias.com/blog/ but he's only using the Fuji lenses with it...
rscheffler wrote:
Zeiss paper: From the series of articles on lens names: Distagon, Biogon and Hologon (pdf link)
Lenses with a very large beam tilt react in a much more sensitive manner to a change of refractive index in the image space caused by filter plates in front of the sensor (such as low pass and IR-blocking filters). If the filter plate is not considered in the design of the lens, the edge definition will suffer. The effect of the additional path through the glass grows exponentially with the beam inclination. A Distagon which never achieves more than 20° beam tilt in the corner of the image reacts more tolerantly than a symmetrical wide- angle lens, which might reach a 45° tilt. This is why filters in digital Leicas are very thin – to remain compatible with older optics. If the filter is significantly thicker, the contrast transfer for the image edge becomes worse for tangential structures....Show more →
Very interesting.
I'm so tempted to pay the $450 to get my AA filter removed on my NEX7 to see what might happen...
rscheffler wrote:
Zeiss paper: From the series of articles on lens names: Distagon, Biogon and Hologon (pdf link)
Lenses with a very large beam tilt react in a much more sensitive manner to a change of refractive index in the image space caused by filter plates in front of the sensor (such as low pass and IR-blocking filters). If the filter plate is not considered in the design of the lens, the edge definition will suffer. The effect of the additional path through the glass grows exponentially with the beam inclination. A Distagon which never achieves more than 20° beam tilt in the corner of the image reacts more tolerantly than a symmetrical wide- angle lens, which might reach a 45° tilt. This is why filters in digital Leicas are very thin – to remain compatible with older optics. If the filter is significantly thicker, the contrast transfer for the image edge becomes worse for tangential structures....Show more →
I suppose the question is: how much change of the refractive index is going on with just glass with IR filter versus glass+IR fitler+AA filter? ie, how much does the AA filter contribute to the problem overall. I thought it was quite a bit.
Even the 50mm Noctilux shot of that scooter (@ f/11) looks off to me at the edges, although the entire image is probably suffering from motion blur. Hopefully kinson will get out during daylight hours and shoot in some decent light.
Maybe those very large rear elements in the X lenses are important after all. The 18mm lens has a larger rear element than the front. All of them seem to have larger rear elements than ZM lenses but I am just eyeballing that observation.
flypenfly: I'd contribute $20 to a fund to have your AA filter replaced if it doesn't work. Maybe others would too... in the name of science!
LR4's moire tool is quite convenient I am finding out.
I was emailing with the president of that company.
Their Postal address is within a 30 minute drive of me in Manhattan though so if we go through with it, I might just be able to go drop off the camera. Something tells me though that they don't have an office per se.
I'm apparently being confused with someone who cares about camera brand. Sure, I shoot a 5N, but only because it is the current best compromise, for me. As soon as something better comes for my lenses, I'll jump (I've come close with the GXR.)
I'm envious that you got MaxMax to email you back. Could you PM me the email that you were dealing with?
I was emailing with the president of that company.
That is the one that seems to have the most experience. I was going to suggest that AA removal really depends on the construction of the sensor filters, but your link says it best. Some of those functional layers are bonded and not easily separated. Also, as one of those posts says, the overall thickness needs to be maintained for proper color balance or IR filtration.
The NEX7 sensor either lends itself to this operation or not, the way I look at it. The maxmax guy should know. I would contribute to the sensor replacement fund, in the name of science.
maxmax has done a nex-7 and found it very time consuming, I don't think it's $450 anymore. He doesn't have samples, hopefully the owner pops up somewhere.
JimBuchanan wrote:
The NEX7 sensor either lends itself to this operation or not, the way I look at it. The maxmax guy should know. I would contribute to the sensor replacement fund, in the name of science.
Or perhaps the maxmax guy is looking for a willing guinea pig to find out about the NEX-7. Jae, does maxmax assume any responsibility if things go wrong during the surgery or are you on the hook for any damages maxmax might cause? If it's the latter, perhaps they would do yours for free as part of their "beta" program, assuming it's the first they may have encountered.
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
maxmax has done a nex-7 and found it very time consuming, I don't think it's $450 anymore. He doesn't have samples, hopefully the owner pops up somewhere.
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
maxmax has done a nex-7 and found it very time consuming, I don't think it's $450 anymore. He doesn't have samples, hopefully the owner pops up somewhere.
