35mm is technically speaking a wide angle, but IRL it's not quite a wide. At least not for my kind of photography. OK, it's a bit individual.
Vignetting can NOT be so easily corrected without loss on density range (photographic latitude). But, yes, the loss of resolution is the main problem. I do agree - generally - the smaller the frame, the better correction technologies have to be used. However, digital sensor introduces it's own limitations and if we summarize lens + sensor (+other technical limitations), today digital FF wide-angle digital FF is still bigger problem than Digital APS wide-angle. BRM J. C. O'Connell wrote: >Excuse me but 35mm focal lenght lenses >are wide angles and there are a whole >bunch of them that are fantastic. > >As far as wider goes, I already just >stated, that small formats like APS >and FF ( film and digital ) are not >very good for wide angle photography >especially compared to medium and large >format. > >Vignetting is not the problem, that >can easily be corrected, the problem >is low resolution of the lenses at >extreme wide angles in corners that is overcome >by large formats but not by small >ones like aps and ff 35mm. > >jco > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >Margus Männik >Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 3:31 PM >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: More rumors ... (and happy New Year) > > >Some? Do you see any satisfactory Pentax FF wideangle on a market? FA24 >will vignette for sure, not speaking of any wider ones. Even Canon can't > >say yet, that they have GOOD wide-angle for their 5D. 20...24mm for FF >is not any kind of ultra-wide, so it refers to limited usability and >needs a real solution, not just to be ignored or cheated. Present >lenses do not offer that and I'm pretty much aware, that instead of >better optics next generation bodies will offer some software trick to >hide (not correct) the problem. > >BRM > > >J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > >>you cant judge a CAMERA BODY >>by the worst lenses out there for it, >>you have to judge it on its >>own merit, and that would be >>what it can do with the BEST >>lenses available. Secondly, I >>dont think its smart to "throw >>out" all improvement you can >>get with semi-wide to ultra long >>lenses just because SOME >>wide angles dont do so well >>on the FF camera. Ultra wide angle >>photography has always been >>a problem for small formats >>anyway, there just isnt enough >>resolution for fine details >>and everything is rendered >>very small on wide and ultra wide >>relatively speaking. >>jco >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >> >> > > > >>Margus Männik >>Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 2:36 PM >>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>Subject: Re: More rumors ... (and happy New Year) >> >> >>Hi, >> >>depends on the lenses you have. Camera body without lenses is totally >>useless. So, this leap can also be a total disaster, especially if you >>like to shoot with wide-angles. I am really not a fan of >> >> >anti-vignetting > > >>and selective sharpening softwares... >>So, for me FF=film=for quality and APS=digital=for versatility. Z-1p >>and >> >>K10D. At least as long as they sell and process film. >> >>BR, Margus >> >> >>J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>>Jump from APS to FF sensor would be just >>>as large or possibly even larger leap >>>than istD to K10D. >>>jco >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >>>Of >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >>>John Forbes >>>Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 4:15 PM >>>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>Subject: Re: More rumors ... (and happy New Year) >>> >>> >>>It's eat your hat time again. I think we have plateaued (?) with >>>regard >>> >>>to DSLR functionality, and further improvements will be incremental. >>> >>> > > > >>>Certainly nothing like the leap from the *ist D to the K10D. >>> >>>John >>> >>> >>> >>>On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 20:52:49 -0000, Jens Bladt >>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>4-5 years? >>>>I expect development to be accelerating. As the *ist has become >>>>somewhat obsolete in 2-3 years, I expect huge improvements every >>>>two-3 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>years - >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>enough >>>>to make me want to upgrade every two-three years! >>>>Regards >>>> >>>>Jens Bladt >>>>Greeting Card: >>>>http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/godtnytaarshow.html >>>> >>>>http://www.jensbladt.dk >>>>+45 56 63 77 11 >>>>+45 23 43 85 77 >>>>Skype: jensbladt248 >>>> >>>>-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >>>>Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af >>>>P. J. >>>>Alling >>>>Sendt: 1. januar 2007 18:46 >>>>Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>Emne: Re: More rumors ... (and happy New Year) >>>> >>>> >>>>Yes, however if you buy a k10D you'll be set for 4-5 years. I expect >>>> >>>> > > > >>>>that they'll be selling to high volume wedding photographers. This >>>>looks like a perfect camera for them. >>>> >>>>Joseph Tainter wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Sony is supposed to come with an FF sensor and camera in 2007 >>>>>(supposedly first part of 2007). >>>>> >>>>>----- >>>>> >>>>>Is anyone else thinking that this is something to consider when >>>>>deciding whether to buy one of the very expensive forthcoming DA* >>>>>zooms, or any other expensive DA lens? >>>>> >>>>>Joe >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>-- >>>>-- >>>> >>>>The more I know of men, the more I like my dog. >>>> -- Anne Louise Germaine de Stael >>>> >>>> >>>>-- >>>>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>PDML@pdml.net >>>>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>>-- >>>>No virus found in this incoming message. >>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>>Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.16.1/611 - Release Date: >>>>12/31/2006 >>>> >>>>-- >>>>No virus found in this outgoing message. >>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>>Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.16.1/611 - Release Date: >>>>12/31/2006 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
