Lens size

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by nseika, Dec 21, 2010.

  1. nseika

    nseika Mu-43 Veteran

    260
    Nov 22, 2010
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Lois
    From the internet, there is this two premises
    - Minimum size for front lens element is focal length / max aperture
    - Smaller sensor system such as m4/3 could have smaller lens design than full frame

    How does these two premises fit each others ? Same fatness but less volume ?

    Thanks for the answer. Just being curious :) 
     
  2. Hikari

    Hikari Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 26, 2010
    Not really. You also need to take field of view and acceptable level of vignetting into the equations. Wide-angle lenses will always have a front element larger than the f-number would suggest.

    Optics to a certain point is a geometric problem. Given an equal angle of coverage, angle of view, and design, an m4/3 lens will be smaller. But, like most generalizations, that can be taken so far.

    Both length and diameter can be reduced to a point.

    Then there are other considerations. Physically, a 4x5 135mm lens is smaller than a 35mm 135mm lens. That is just because the way the cameras are made--a 4x5 does not need a helical focus mechanism nor does the lens construction have anything to do with lens-to-image plane distance (4x5 cameras have bellows).

    A few more thoughts. A lens can be shorter than the focal length would suggest--that is what a "telephoto" is--or longer, a reverse telephoto. You do not need to change the lens to sensor distance to focus, you can do that by changing focal length--that is what an IF (internal focus) lens is.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.