Rethink that, Adam. You need center elements bigger than that. The front element has to be larger still. The aperture openings are the size you state. And since they outlawed the use of stuff like thorium glass, the elements have to be larger than they did in older lenses (that is one of the reasons why current high-speed lenses are so damn bulky).
-- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" ----------------------------------- Adam Maas wrote: > Because you need a 35.7mm diameter front element for a 50mm f1.4, or a > 41.6mm front element for a 50mm f1.2. The Pentax FA 50mm f1.4 is already > about the smallest on the market, at it's size, I'd suspect the size of > the optics necessary for the speed are more of a limiting factor than > the image circle or barrel design. I would liek to see an updated D-FA > version. > > And there's already a 50mm f2.8 with Quick-shift focus, the D-FA Macro unit. > > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: >> Why couldn't they make a smaller 50/1.4? >> >> Yes, a nice, fast 28 would be wonderful, and a 35/1.4 would be a kick as >> well. >> >> Jumping to a 50/2.8 would seem like a real step backwards for any number of >> reasons. >> >> Shel >> >> >> >> >>> [Original Message] >>> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi >> >>> I don't see that they'd be able to make a 50mm f/1.4-1.2 lens much >>> smaller than the current FA50/1.4 and it is a great performer. It >>> would be much more to my liking if they released the same optics in a >>> D-FA lens mount. A compact, pancake DA50/2.8 Limited might be neat, >>> but I'd rather they did a compact DA28/2 Limited! >> >> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
