[Leica] Re:

["Dan Post" <dwpost@email.msn.com>]

Good question, but then I was looking in a book about lenses, and I saw the
diagrahm of the Hologon 16mm/f8! A wide angle, but what a chuck of glass-
the computer designed lens has so much glass in it that there is no room for
an aperture/iris!

might it have something to do with the film coverage of the lens? All the
most wide open lenses, like the Canon f/0.95 and the Leitz f/1 seem to be
the prime focal length, or close to it.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Peterson_Art@hq.navsea.navy.mil <Peterson_Art@hq.navsea.navy.mil>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Wednesday, December 17, 1997 12:41 PM


>
>     Recent discussion about the use of high-speed wide-angle lenses brings
>     to mind something I've wondered about for years.  The designs of large
>     aperture lenses generally seem to involve large expanses of glass, all
>     other things being equal (e.g., the Noctilux), which stands to reason,
>     at least from my layman's viewpoint.  Conversely, in each photographic
>     format, the designs of moderate wide-angle lenses generally would seem
>     to permit the minimization of lens size (e.g., for 35mm Leica M series
>     cameras, the extremely small size of the pre-aspherical 35mm Summicron
>     and Summilux lenses and the 40mm Summicron-C).  Therefore, based on an
>     assumption that no one would want to tote around a huge chunk of glass
>     and metal (e.g., the Noctilux) if it weren't necessary, then why is it
>     that when lens makers design higher speed lenses (going from f/1.4, to
>     f/1.2, and ultimately to f/1), all of them (e.g., Leica, Nikon, Canon,
>     Minolta, Olympus, and the rest) do it in the 50mm-to-58mm focal length
>     range rather than, say, the 35mm-to-40mm focal length range?  With any
>     given maximum aperture, is not a 35mm lens smaller and more convenient
>     that a 50mm or 58mm lens for the same camera, and so would not a small
>     (relatively) and convenient 35mm f/1 Noctilux M lens be far preferable
>     to a larger, heavier, and more conspicuous 50mm f/1 Noctilux?  And yet
>     none exists (or as far as I have ascertained, has ever existed)---why?