Mal1905
Joined: 30 Oct 2008
Posts: 1705
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:20 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Mal1905 wrote:
Sell it to me and I'll enlighten you 
_________________
Canon EOS 5D / EOS 40D
Carl Zeiss Jena: Flektogon 2.8/20, 2.4/35, 2.8/35, Pancolar 2/50, MC 1.8/50, MC 1.8/80, Triotar 4/135, Tessar 2.8/50, S 4/135 1Q, S 3.5/135, Sonnar 3.5/135 MC, 2.8/180, Biotar 2/5,8cm, 2/58, 1.5/75
Carl Zeiss: Distagon 2/28 T*, 1.4/35 T*, Ultron 1.8/50, Tessar 2.8/50, Planar 1.4/50 T* MM, 1.7/50 T* MM, 1.4/85 T* AEG, Sonnar 2.8/135 T*
Asahi Optical Co.: Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 4.5/20, 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 2/35, 3.5/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 1.8/85, 2.8/105, 2.8/120, 2.5/135 I & II, 3.5/135, 4/150, 4/200, 4/300, 5.6/400, 4/45-125, 4.5/85-210, Super-Takumar 4.5/20, 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 2/35, 3.5/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 2/55, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, 4/150, 4/200, 4.5/70-150, Fish-Eye-Takumar 4/17, Macro-Takumar 4/50, Super-Macro Takumar 4/50, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-Takumar 4/50, 4/100, Bellows-Takumar 4/100, Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 3.5/50, 2.4/58, 3.5/100, Asahi-Kogaku Tele-Takumar 3.5/135, Auto-Takumar 2.3/35, 3.5/35, 1.8/55, 1.8/55 (Zebra), 2/55, 2.2/55, 1.8/85, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, Takumar 4/35, 2.2/55, 2/58, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 5.6/200, 6.3/300, SMC Takumar 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 2/55, SMC-M 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 2/50
Tomioka: Tominon 2/5cm, Auto-Chinon 3.5/21, 1.4/55, Auto-Yashinon DS-M 1.2/55 |
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Marco Cavina writes that on-field tests made on production lenses demonstrated for the Hollywood an effective aperture of f/2.2
http://www.luciolepri.it/lc2/marcocavina/articoli_fotografici/Glatzel-2-28/00_pag.htm
Amongst the various Hollywood prototypes shown by Marco there are some who have an effective f/2.0 aperture, but for the production, the prototype #7, having an aperture of f/2.1, was chosen, probably - as Marco writes - because it was the best corrected one.
I would like to add that it's common marketing strategy for many makers to "adjust" a little the nominal speed of the lenses... f/1.2 that are really f/1.3... f/2 that are f/2.1... f/1.4 that are f/1.5... f/1.8 that are f/1.9...
I recommend reading the Marco Cavina article, even with a translator it's still an amazing reading for lens lovers.
Of course, I do not mind if the Hollywood is slower than the nominal value. I don't use it because of f/2, I use it, to quote Marco Cavina, because of
| Quote: |
| the homogeneous rendering, the classic Zeiss micro-contrast fingerprint, and the 3D effect, second only to the 1.4/35. |
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
