Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Accessories & Storage
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 20th of July 2013 (Sat)   #1
Rstanford
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 142
Default Why no focal reducer

Does anyone know why canon or anyone else for that matter does not make focal reducer? Wouldn't you like to turn your 50 1.4 into a 35 f1.0 or close to it.

Last edited by Rstanford : 20th of July 2013 (Sat) at 21:54.
Rstanford is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 20th of July 2013 (Sat)   #2
krb
Cream of the Crop
 
krb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
Posts: 8,818
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

Lack of demand is probably the largest issue. I suspect that there are technical issues with making them work well on the wide angle lenses where such a tool would be desired.
__________________
-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr
Gear list
krb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th of July 2013 (Sat)   #3
Jon
Moderator

Cocker Spaniel Mod

 
Jon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
Posts: 67,774
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

Well, technically there are - they're called "close-up lenses" and they screw onto the front of your lens. The drawback is that they also take away infinity focus. There are a very few rear-mounting examples of this; one of which is the 1:1 adapter for the 50 mm f/2.5 macro (which focuses to 1:2 without the adapter; the adapter lets it focus to 1:1, and will also let other lenses focus closer than normal).
__________________
Jon
----------

Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities

Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE
Jon is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 20th of July 2013 (Sat)   #4
sapearl
emailed Tim some prozac
 
sapearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 14,807
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

They seem to be popular among astronomers. Some do cause an amount of vignetting though.
sapearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th of July 2013 (Sat)   #5
Wilt
Cream of the Crop
 
Wilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 33,255
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

The only focal length reducer that mounts on the rear of the lens I have ever heard of is one which only reduces the size of the image circle to a smaller format coverage, in order to both produce more angle of view.
__________________
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention
Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.php
Wilt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th of July 2013 (Sat)   #6
Rstanford
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 142
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/15/m...f-nex-adapter/

"increasing the speed of a lens by a full stop. That may sound impossible, but it apparently works by concentrating the extra light-gathering area of a full-frame lens down to the smaller E-mount sensor area, turning an f4.0 lens into an f2.8 lens,"
Rstanford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th of July 2013 (Sat)   #7
Wilt
Cream of the Crop
 
Wilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 33,255
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

This not only talks about the FL reducer, but in the first paragraph mentions what inherently has made that difficult up until now...

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/...s-adapter.html
__________________
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention
Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.php
Wilt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th of July 2013 (Sat)   #8
Rstanford
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 142
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

This is the direction canon needs to go in, they need to make a small sensor dslr in a small frame like the eos-m and make a focal reducer. then we can have below f1 lenses.
Rstanford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st of July 2013 (Sun)   #9
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 24,468
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

You can't make a focal reducer for EF lenses to work on an EOS camera. The way they work requires space for the focal reducer to fit in the optical path, which only works adapting to significantly shallower mounts. They can make one to use EF lenses on a NEX because the mount depth is about 26mm difference. You also require a larger imaging circle, so you'd have to use a FF lens on a APS-C body, or a medium format lens on a FF body, etc.
__________________
Taylor
Galleries: Flickr
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s
tkbslc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st of July 2013 (Sun)   #10
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 24,468
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rstanford View Post
This is the direction canon needs to go in, they need to make a small sensor dslr in a small frame like the eos-m and make a focal reducer. then we can have below f1 lenses.
But since you have to go to a smaller sensor for them to work, you take away effective aperture. All it does is get you back to where you would be if you used the lens on a FF camera in the first place.

Also, the attractiveness of a small camera like the EOS-M diminishes rapidly with adapters and larger FF lenses.
__________________
Taylor
Galleries: Flickr
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s
tkbslc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st of July 2013 (Sun)   #11
Rstanford
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 142
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

If thats not what I said thats what I meant, they need a smaller sensor in a small frame dslr camera.
Rstanford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st of July 2013 (Sun)   #12
maverick75
Goldmember
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Riverside,California
Posts: 3,613
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

Cameras are getting better and better at high ISO that I think lens manufacturer are going to stop trying to make them faster.
__________________
- Alex Corona
Flickr - 500px -Website
FS: Metal body Polaroid land Camera, Restored. $50
maverick75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st of July 2013 (Sun)   #13
ElectronGuru
Member
 
ElectronGuru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 421
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

Quote:
Originally Posted by maverick75 View Post
Cameras are getting better and better at high ISO that I think lens manufacturer are going to stop trying to make them faster.
The relevance of big apertures is changing. The point used to be compensating for slow ISO. With that disappearing, the relevance will be DOF. If shallow DOF is not worth it for customers, they will stop buying them and manufacturers will stop making them. If shallow DOF is worth it, manufacturers will not stop. When I show someone a photo of them taken at 1.2, they get all excited and ask what camera I'm using. What they really want to know is how do I get a fast lens.

Tying back into topic: as tkbslc notes above, reducers seem to be creating equivalency with FF, not really gaining an advantage. You're shrinking the projected light as you're shrinking the sensor. 1.4 becomes 1.0 in brightness (concentrated light), but not shallow DOF. 1.4 on FF will look like 1.4 on crop + reducer, just with less of the ISO than would normally be needed.
__________________
"Light is the paint, lenses are brush, sensors are the canvas"

6D | 100L Macro | 50L | 24L TSE

Builder of custom flashlights, OVEREADY.com

Last edited by ElectronGuru : 21st of July 2013 (Sun) at 16:52. Reason: Improved info
ElectronGuru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st of July 2013 (Sun)   #14
maverick75
Goldmember
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Riverside,California
Posts: 3,613
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

Well all know aperture is not the only thing that controls DOF....
__________________
- Alex Corona
Flickr - 500px -Website
FS: Metal body Polaroid land Camera, Restored. $50
maverick75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st of July 2013 (Sun)   #15
Rstanford
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 142
Default Re: Why no focal reducer

It also improves sharpness in the center.
Rstanford is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NEW .8 Reducer/Flattener...... strgazr27 Astronomy and Celestial 11 30th of November 2008 (Sun) 17:56
Focal Reducer Johnny9s Astronomy and Celestial Talk 1 30th of September 2008 (Tue) 13:45
Noise Reducer Circa2000 RAW, Post Processing and Printing 11 13th of January 2007 (Sat) 16:31
Noise reducer Veearsix RAW, Post Processing and Printing 0 8th of July 2005 (Fri) 17:13
EF focal reducer? pcasciola Canon EOS Digital Cameras 0 28th of November 2004 (Sun) 20:17


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:05.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.