Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/09/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Indeed. Although I don't yet consider myself an old fart, I have used a variety of format so I just picked and chose appropriate lenses for each of the format. There is no notion of "full-frame" AFAIC. I've used: Minox (8x11mm) 110 (13x17mm) Four-Thirds (13.5x18mm) Canon digital (15.1x22.7mm) Half-frame 35mm (18x24mm) Leica M8 (18x27mm) Leica 35mm (24x36mm) 126 (28x28mm) 127 (36x38mm) 645 (42x56mm) 66 (56x56mm) 67 (56x68mm) 69 (56x84mm) 45 (96x122mm) So, I don't know what "full-frame" really means. :) :) I don't really care about my M8 being "cropped." With a 35mm Summilux-ASPH, it's better than M6 with Noctilux. On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Lottermoser George <imagist3@mac.com>wrote: > ; ~ ) indeed > > I would like people > to speak > simply and accurately > in terms of size > > as an elder-fart > we always referred to 8x10, 6x6, 6x9, 35mm etc. > in harmony with focal length of lens > never heard of "full frame" (a term totally without meaning) > 'til digital sensors arrived > > tell me the specific > sensor size (or film dimension) > and lens focal length > I can visualize > the field of view > with that information > > this "crop factor" "full frame" "35mm equivalent" > stuff just turns a simple thing into double speak > > Fond regards, > George > > george@imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com/blog > http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist > > > > On Sep 23, 2008, at 9:54 AM, Douglas Sharp wrote: > > Hi George >> I suggest calling "normal" format "Double-cine" or "Barnack" format :-) >> (I refrain from writing "OB" format, OB is the best selling brand of >> Tampons in Germany) >> Cheers >> Douglas >> >> >> Lottermoser George wrote: >> >>> never understood >>> "normal" >>> (except as a city in Illinois) >>> >>> never met a normal person >>> never met a normal lens >>> >>> glass plate, tintype cameras: >>> 6.5 x 8.5 inches Full-plate >>> 4.5 x 5.5 inches Half-plate >>> 3.125 x 4.125 inches Quarter-plate >>> 2.5 x 3.5 inches Sixth-plate >>> 2 x 2.5 inches Ninth-plate >>> 1.625 x 2.125 inches Sixteenth-plate >>> .5 x 1 inch Gem >>> >>> film cameras that I've actually used: >>> 12 x 20 inches >>> 11 x 14 inches >>> 8 x 10 inches >>> 5 x 7 inches >>> 4 x 5 inches >>> 3.25 x 4.25 inches >>> 2.25 x 3.25 inches >>> various polaroid formats from 8x10 to sx70 >>> 2.25 x 2.75590553 inches >>> 2.25 x 2.25 inches >>> 24 x 36 mm >>> 16 mm >>> >>> film cameras I've not used: >>> half frame >>> minox (what ever size that is) >>> variwide (what ever size that is) >>> and many other specialized formats >>> >>> Digital sensor cameras (a partial list): >>> 4 x 3 mm >>> 4.536 x 3.416 mm >>> 4.8 x 3.6 mm >>> 5.27 x 3.96 mm >>> 6.4 x 4.8 mm >>> 7.176 x 5.319 mm >>> 8.8 x 6.6 mm >>> 12.8 x 9.6 mm >>> 18 x 13.5 mm >>> 22.7 x 15.1 mm >>> 23.7 x 15.6 mm >>> 25.1 x 16.7 mm >>> 36 x 24 mm >>> 30 x 45 mm (Leica S2) >>> 56 x 41.5 mm >>> >>> "normal" format >>> and related lenses >>> have never existed >>> in the world of photography >>> for more than a short time >>> >>> "normal" = whatever >>> camera/lens you're making >>> a photograph with >>> >>> Fond regards, >>> George >>> >>> george@imagist.com >>> http://www.imagist.com >>> http://www.imagist.com/blog >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 23, 2008, at 1:40 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote: >>> >>> To me a normal lens is what spells it out. >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > -- Ken Iisaka first name at last name dot org or com