This is not a new observation.SInce I started shooting with rangefinder 35mm film cameras, I noticed a very different look to my wide angle images. Especially when using WA lenses with a more symmetrical design with the rear element deep into lens mount, like the zeiss 35mm f2.8/21mm f4. It's more than just the lack of barrel distortion, I think it's a difference in projection onto the film. It just seems to look more natural. Anyone else notice this?
It just seems to look more natural.
I should have added that in many ways the OP asked a non-question. It is a non-question because we rarely have the luxury of choosing which type of wide angle lens to use with a particular camera.
Photographers who use SLRs are by and large stuck with retrofocus wide angle lenses because the rear of the lens has to clear the mirror. The only exception I can think of is split mirror Bronicas, which work with lenses whose rear cell goes deep into the camera.
Photographers who use rangefinder cameras or, in larger formats, press/technical/view cameras are by and large stuck with more-or-less symmetrical w/a lenses that have short back focus. This is one of the reasons why there are recessed lens boards for many technical and view cameras.
There's no reason why lenses for these cameras must have long back focus. Designing a lens for flange-to-film distance approximately equal to focal length (this is called "normal construction," not to be confused with focal length normal for a format) is easier than designing for flange-to-film distance much longer than focal length. Retrofocus lenses cost more to make than lenses of normal construction.
Although not too many can afford a Leica but when people go digital they have the choice of the mirrorless some of which has the flange distance as short as 16mm. Do they make symmetrical WA lenses for these?
Photographers who use SLRs are by and large stuck with retrofocus wide angle lenses because the rear of the lens has to clear the mirror. The only exception I can think of is split mirror Bronicas, which work with lenses whose rear cell goes deep into the camera.
Not exactly, and whether the lens is w/a depends on chip size, but Rodenstock made a few more-or-less symmetrical short lenses with short back focus. See www.rodenstock-photo.com/Archiv/Objektive%20digitale%20Fotografie%20e.pdfAlthough not too many can afford a Leica but when people go digital they have the choice of the mirrorless some of which has the flange distance as short as 16mm. Do they make symmetrical WA lenses for these?
Not exactly, and whether the lens is w/a depends on chip size, but Rodenstock made a few more-or-less symmetrical short lenses with short back focus. See www.rodenstock-photo.com/Archiv/Objektive%20digitale%20Fotografie%20e.pdf
So did Schneider, see https://web.archive.org/web/20061106074937/http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/pdf/foto/digitare_e.pdf
If you have a Cambo Actus, there the 24 mm Actar lens. I have no idea who makes it.
Sorry, out of my range.I am talking about a camera with the sensor size the same size as a Leica M and with shorter flange distance.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?