alundeb wrote: cputeq wrote:
I am unsure if this also causes the m43 to magically gain 2 stops of light, though.
You are unsure, but still write lengthy posts trying to explain how it works?
Nice catch but slightly different topic My (rather long, sorry) posts were most about light-per-time and whether that aspect has any real meaning in the context of a generic \"FF vs crop\" argument.
I am unsure of this particular aspect above because the details on the m43 adapter are sparse. For instance, knowing that the adapter only has to cover the m43 surface area, does this mean they will design it to not collect and condense all the light from a FF lens (but instead just sample an APS-C area of the lens, even if the lens is FF?) I could imagine this as actually being a possibility, to reduce the angles of light captured (which, combined with the fact they\'re from the very edge of the FF lens, might lead to some pretty horrific aberrations).
One would imagine if the m43 version of this adapter were to condense this FF-area light into m43, they would have no problems proclaiming a potential 2-stop gain, but I haven\'t read about this in any of their material or on the web. Perhaps they\'re being careful about any claims until they\'ve actually developed a prototype for m43, or perhaps there is only a condensing of an APS-C section of the lens instead of the entire lens as guess above, etc.
alundeb wrote: cputeq wrote:
I am unsure if this also causes the m43 to magically gain 2 stops of light, though.
You are unsure, but still write lengthy posts trying to explain how it works?
Nice catch but slightly different topic My (rather long, sorry) posts were most about light-per-time and whether that aspect has any real meaning in the context of a generic \"FF vs crop\" argument.
I am unsure of this particular aspect above because the details on the m43 adapter are sparse. For instance, knowing that the adapter only has to cover the m43 surface area, does this mean they will design it to not collect and condense all the light from a FF lens (but instead just sample an APS-C area of the lens, even if the lens is FF?)
One would imagine if the m43 version of this adapter were to condense this FF-area light into m43, they would have no problems proclaiming a potential 2-stop gain, but I haven\'t read about this in any of their material or on the web. Perhaps they\'re being careful about any claims until they\'ve actually developed a prototype for m43, or perhaps there is only a condensing of an APS-C section of the lens instead of the entire lens, etc.
alundeb wrote: cputeq wrote:
I am unsure if this also causes the m43 to magically gain 2 stops of light, though.
You are unsure, but still write lengthy posts trying to explain how it works?
Nice catch but slightly different topic My (rather long, sorry) posts were most about light-per-time.
I am unsure of this particular aspect above because the details on the m43 adapter are sparse. For instance, knowing that the adapter only has to cover the m43 surface area, does this mean they will design it to not collect and condense all the light from a FF lens (but instead just sample an APS-C area of the lens, even if the lens is FF?)
One would imagine if the m43 version of this adapter were to condense this FF-area light into m43, they would have no problems proclaiming a potential 2-stop gain, but I haven\'t read about this in any of their material or on the web. Perhaps they\'re being careful about any claims until they\'ve actually developed a prototype for m43, or perhaps there is only a condensing of an APS-C section of the lens instead of the entire lens, etc.
alundeb wrote: cputeq wrote:
I am unsure if this also causes the m43 to magically gain 2 stops of light, though.
You are unsure, but still write lengthy posts trying to explain how it works?
Nice catch but slightly different topic My (rather long, sorry) posts were most about light-per-time.
I am unsure of this particular aspect above because the details on the m43 adapter are sparse. For instance, knowing that the adapter only has to cover the m43 surface area, does this mean they will design it to not collect and condense all the light from a FF lens (but instead just sample an APS-C area of the lens, even if the lens is FF?)
One would imagine if the m43 version of this adapter were to condense this FF-area light into m43, they would have no problems proclaiming a potential 2-stop gain, but I haven\'t read about this in any of their material or on the web. Perhaps they\'re being careful about any claims until they\'ve actually developed a prototype for m43, or perhaps there is a sampling downsize, etc. which is why I mentioned my caveat.
My (rather long, sorry) posts were most about light-per-time and whether that aspect has any real meaning in the context of a generic \"FF vs crop\" argument.