If you want to shoot film and digital in parallel (I wonder why?)then two things can happen if the cameras have the same format. One outcome is that you'll go crazy swapping lenses from one camera to the other as you alternate the medium. The other outcome is that you'll want a duplicate set of lenses, one set for each camera. This isn't as silly as it sounds. When I shot film I had multiple prime lenses to choose from between 35mm and 135mm, plus 3 continuously overlapping zooms from 24mm to 210mm and a single example of a 17mm and a 500mm. So, from 35mm to 135mm I was always able to have two cameras at the same focal length. That might also be your situation.
But having different formats creates an interesting possibility. If you contrive to have your lenses separated by an interval of 1.5x focal lengths (as near as possible), then you can achieve parallel shooting while not needing a duplicate lens at each focal length. All it means is that you need one wideangle lens 1.5x shorter and one tele lens 1.5x longer to get a full set of equivalent-field-of-view pairs of lenses. You can buy a lot of lens for the price difference between an APS DSLR and a FF DSLR. Pentax will earn more by selling you lenses than selling you cameras. What would you do if you were Pentax? How many Pentax customers will pay a 100% premium to get a full frame sensor? It'll come when the price gap shortens, but Cotty's hat is safe for the moment. Regards, Anthony > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > John Sessoms > Sent: Wednesday, 22 October 2008 12:01 PM > To: pdml@pdml.net > Subject: RE: Full Frame: what is it? > > From: Anthony Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > If you think being able to use old wide angle lenses will justify an > > investment in a full frame camera (in whatever format), you need to read > > around. The interaweb is replete with tales of film era lenses, especially > > wides, being found wanting when put in front of digital cameras, especially > > so when the full frame is being imaged. Almost inevitably a new lens will > > be purchased soon after the new camera, a camera which ironically had been > > intended to stretch the useful life of the old lenses. Why not cut out the > > middleman and buy a new lens for the camera you have right now. The > > residual value of the pre digital lens will be near to zero anyway, so cut > > your losses on it and move on. > > Because it's not about residual value and middlemen or "interaweb" old > wives tales. > > It's about I already have the lenses; I already use them with my current > digital equipment while continuing to use them with my film equipment. I > have a kit that works with both my film & my digital SLRs. I intend to > keep it that way. > > But I would like to get the same angle of view out of the lens from both > my film and my digital cameras. It would be convenient. I'm not going to > buy an additional lens just to overcome the crop factor. > > If Pentax eventually comes out with a "Full Frame" DSLR, I might buy one > if I have the money. > > If I do buy one, one of the reasons for doing so would be so I could > take advantage of my existing wide angle lenses. ONE of the reasons. > > There would have to be other advantages, or it wouldn't be enough to > motivate me to buy another DSLR. > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
