Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> The only reason that 'crop factor' is meaningful, really, is because it > is in general easier to design a particular lens having a particular > resolution, etc. when the coverage is less. For example the Schneider > Super Symmar XL 150/5.6 -- considered an *exceptional* super wide angle > for the 8x10 format ... aspheric yada yada yada, with lots and lots of > lpmm **for 8x10** but if you were to slap this on a 35mm it would be a > downright dud ... super expensive, slow, low resolution etc. > > So basically for the APS-c factor you are 'paying for' a 35mm format > lens but only the APS-c lpmm. > > Jonathan > Actually come to think of it you were comparing sheet film formats and I was comparing roll film formats. And in sheet film formats it is quite common to use a lens designed for say 5x7 film to shoot 4x5. And when doing that to use the term "crop factor" does not sound way off. But Hasselblad glass to Leica glass does. ON family road trips when I was 12 it was '63 and my dad had a Contarex and I was saving up for my first Hasselblad we'd have discussions or arguments as to which was better; Contarex or Hasselblad. And Hasselblad was pushing it's 35mm back at the time. There were pictures of it everywhere in brochures and catalogs. It seems to me that for that short while they were considering having this be a definite option. I didn't know it was temporary if that. So I'd say I could shoot 35mm any time I wanted to on my Hasselblad but also have the option for medium format. And my dad would tell my the Hasselblad glass wasn't going to make for a nice 35mm image. And I was telling him he was nuts how could that be possible. And I was twelve. And he was (at least his friends thought) thought to be up for a Nobel or some such prize for a big thing he just did. In medicine. Mark Rabiner Photography Portland Oregon http://rabinergroup.com/ No Archive