Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> I read your web page. Interesting. But two things, the focal length of > 43mm comes closest to the impression the human eye yields as far as > magnification. I've got a standing challenge open on this issue. Basicly "prove it". What experiment should I do that will prove this to me? > As for 50mm being easiest to design, not true. Short teles are the easiest > to design, because the angle the light passes through the lens is > minimized compared to longer and shorter focal lengths according to the > optical designers I've read. The reason 50s are so cheap is there are so many > of them! I don't know about which is easiest to design. I'm talking about cheapest to make. Nikon or Canon can make a pretty damned good 50/1.8 that costs them about $30 to manufacture. That's certainly not due to the number made. Nikon/Canon don't even make that many any more. How much does it cost for a 20mm f/1.8 or a 200mm f/1.8? > Notice, the 90 Summicron isn't any more expensive than the > 50 Summicron. The 50/2 is about $945 and the 90/2 is about $1695. See what I mean? - -- Chris Bitmead http://www.ans.com.au/~chrisb mailto:chrisb@ans.com.au