Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Larry: The size of the Nikon or Canon lenses will have little to do with the size of a Leica equivalent on the M cameras. M lenses are always smaller than the equvalent SLR lens. It has something to do with the lack of a mirror and that the lens can be closer to the film plane. My Noctilux is physically no bigger than a Canon 50mm 1.8 EF lens. It is much heavier though! The canon 50mm F1 is probably twice the size of the Noctilux and heavier. Perhaps Erwin Putts could explain why the M lenses are so small compared to their counterparts in the R line. Regards, Robert At 03:14 PM 9/23/99 -0500, Larry Kopitnik wrote: > >Canon's 24 mm f/1.4 lens has, I believe, a 72 mm filter front. As does >Nikon's 28 mm f/1.4. Seems like that would be quite the viewfinder blocker, >and therefore impracticle, on an M camera. > >But Nikon's 24 mm f/2 lens has just a 52 mm filter front. And I'd think >modern aspherics could make such a lens smaller and/or lighter and/or >optically better than the Nikon (and the 24 f/2 Nikkor is no slouch to >begin with). That seems entirely practical -- and a realistic hope -- for >the M system. > >Larry > > >