Tariq Gibran wrote:
I have to say - and this is not just directed at you - that it\'s amazing to me how many optical design/ lens experts we have on these forums (seemingly all of a sudden).
No worries.
+1 @ optical design experts (although I did personally study under one from the Pentagon) ... which I\'m obviously not. I just know my trig really well (which you really can\'t violate with vector forces, but just develop complex compromises) and have paid close attention to the cause/effects in differing UWA designs ... sufficient to realize that there is no \"free lunch\" here just because the mirror has been taken out of the equation. The equation to be solved still remains the same (given fov to cover 24x36), just one less obstacle to contend with (mirror).
I\'ve said it for a very long time that optics are a series of compromises and the wider you go, the tougher it gets ... choose your poison(s).
Zeiss, Leica, Schneider may have the best chops to give it a go, but Zeiss liekly has the most $$$ interest to do so, given their relationship with Sony. That, and they really do know how to employ mustache distortion better than anyone else. Which btw, if you\'re in the market for progressive bifocals ... get the Zeiss.
Oct 22, 2013 at 09:03 AM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #11880596 « A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses »
