-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
His new stuff seems to be brands, but this is his first camera brand video that I have seen. He used to be in Donut media which was mostly cars - and some of them were very stupid but the basic idea is doing a historical review and presenting it in a simple and somewhat entertaining manner.
For example - the following is about Carhartt - which is not something I usually care about, but it is still interesting -
The video explains the history very well.
Something important is lost.
Zeiss and Leitz had and still have different approaches to air lenses vs. cementing individual lenses.
This is not an issue in the age of multi-coated any more, but at that time.
This is very visible in the planar development (Zeiss) and the Leitz solutions in the “battle” for light intensity.
The second major competition problem between both optics manufacturers is early series production (contax but low sales) versus manual manufacturing production with high quantities.
Leitz produced a lot more, although individually handcrafted, than Zeiss with its already standardized production
The first standardized model series at Leitz was the M model series.
The conclusion that short flange focal length produces good images is a myth.
Each outer lens can be calculated to any focal length.
But: and here the error lies in the reasoning; Not every optically optimized system can generate longer rear image plane of any length or shortness.
The Sonnar from Zeiss has light intensity but due to the system it does not allow you to work on an SLR used a longer focal image plane length.
It requires the mirrorless or analogue viewfinder.
All optics today are based on a planar system. Which was very important as a copying system for reproduction. Which need a loger distance to "copy-paper"
Therefore, the conclusion that only short distances to film or sensor make better images is wrong.
Don't worry, the Brad Pitt bonus remains ;-)
What is important after switching from the analog round film grain to the flat sensor pixel with a shorter focal length is the angle at which the light beam hits.
It doesn't matter when it comes to the grain, the light always hits orthogonally.
There is a difference in the sensor, including the pixels with half a sphere on them. The shorter the focal length, the more telecentric the lenses are.
These require larger lenses at the lens exit towards the sensor. (recalculation of many lenses below the format diagonal/normal focal length) A lot have new MKII editions
What requires larger bayonets RF(canon) Z (Nikon) if you also have to accommodate electrical transmission contacts that are also used for AF control.
The video is really honest, the M bayonet is well thought out even today . . . if you don't want to offer AF!
I deliberately use the Fuji X-A system because it doesn't have a viewfinder
Looking at the almost anti-reflective screen gives the eye space to see what is on the right or left of the subject. Like next to the viewfinder frame
It's mirrorless, so it only requires optics with a short rear lens plane... ;-) I'll be sure
and there are purely mechanical lenses as very good copies from the 80s (adapted to the sensor need) that even have the light intensity to be able to have all the design options in the smaller format.
post script:
after some sleep and watching the video repeatedly, there is a very good news,
Nikon and Canon can now finally take good photos with the new mirrorless systems
Something important is lost.
Zeiss and Leitz had and still have different approaches to air lenses vs. cementing individual lenses.
This is not an issue in the age of multi-coated any more, but at that time.
This is very visible in the planar development (Zeiss) and the Leitz solutions in the “battle” for light intensity.
The second major competition problem between both optics manufacturers is early series production (contax but low sales) versus manual manufacturing production with high quantities.
Leitz produced a lot more, although individually handcrafted, than Zeiss with its already standardized production
The first standardized model series at Leitz was the M model series.
The conclusion that short flange focal length produces good images is a myth.
Each outer lens can be calculated to any focal length.
But: and here the error lies in the reasoning; Not every optically optimized system can generate longer rear image plane of any length or shortness.
The Sonnar from Zeiss has light intensity but due to the system it does not allow you to work on an SLR used a longer focal image plane length.
It requires the mirrorless or analogue viewfinder.
All optics today are based on a planar system. Which was very important as a copying system for reproduction. Which need a loger distance to "copy-paper"
Therefore, the conclusion that only short distances to film or sensor make better images is wrong.
Don't worry, the Brad Pitt bonus remains ;-)
What is important after switching from the analog round film grain to the flat sensor pixel with a shorter focal length is the angle at which the light beam hits.
It doesn't matter when it comes to the grain, the light always hits orthogonally.
There is a difference in the sensor, including the pixels with half a sphere on them. The shorter the focal length, the more telecentric the lenses are.
These require larger lenses at the lens exit towards the sensor. (recalculation of many lenses below the format diagonal/normal focal length) A lot have new MKII editions
What requires larger bayonets RF(canon) Z (Nikon) if you also have to accommodate electrical transmission contacts that are also used for AF control.
The video is really honest, the M bayonet is well thought out even today . . . if you don't want to offer AF!
I deliberately use the Fuji X-A system because it doesn't have a viewfinder
Looking at the almost anti-reflective screen gives the eye space to see what is on the right or left of the subject. Like next to the viewfinder frame
It's mirrorless, so it only requires optics with a short rear lens plane... ;-) I'll be sure
and there are purely mechanical lenses as very good copies from the 80s (adapted to the sensor need) that even have the light intensity to be able to have all the design options in the smaller format.
post script:
after some sleep and watching the video repeatedly, there is a very good news,
Nikon and Canon can now finally take good photos with the new mirrorless systems
Last edited:
