Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories
Thread started 20 Jul 2013 (Saturday) 21:50
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Why no focal reducer

 
Rstanford
Member
181 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Jul 20, 2013 21:50 |  #1

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.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
krb
Cream of the Crop
krb's Avatar
8,818 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
Jul 20, 2013 21:53 |  #2

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!
Flickrexternal link
Gear list

LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Jon's Avatar
69,628 posts
Joined Jun 2004
Bethesda, MD USA
Jul 20, 2013 21:59 |  #3

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

LOG IN TO REPLY
sapearl
emailed Tim some prozac
sapearl's Avatar
15,440 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Joined Dec 2005
Cleveland, Ohio
Jul 20, 2013 22:03 |  #4

They seem to be popular among astronomers. Some do cause an amount of vignetting though.


GEAR LIST
MY WEBSITEexternal link- MY GALLERIESexternal link- MY BLOGexternal link
Artists Archives of the Western Reserveexternal link - Board

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Wilt is an old fart who has extensive experience with many brands and many formats of cameras, and extensive lighting knowledge of both studio lighting and speedlights
Wilt's Avatar
35,873 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Jul 20, 2013 22:31 |  #5

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.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost!
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.p​hp

LOG IN TO REPLY
Rstanford
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
181 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Jul 20, 2013 22:58 |  #6

http://www.engadget.co​m ...edbooster-ef-nex-adapter/external link

"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,"




LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Wilt is an old fart who has extensive experience with many brands and many formats of cameras, and extensive lighting knowledge of both studio lighting and speedlights
Wilt's Avatar
35,873 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Jul 20, 2013 22:59 |  #7

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 ...reducer-lens-adapter.htmlexternal link


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost!
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.p​hp

LOG IN TO REPLY
Rstanford
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
181 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Jul 20, 2013 23:51 |  #8

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.




LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,562 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Utah, USA
Jul 21, 2013 00:03 |  #9

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: Flickrexternal link
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,562 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Utah, USA
Jul 21, 2013 00:06 |  #10

Rstanford wrote in post #16138966external link
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: Flickrexternal link
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

LOG IN TO REPLY
Rstanford
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
181 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Jul 21, 2013 00:10 |  #11

If thats not what I said thats what I meant, they need a smaller sensor in a small frame dslr camera.




LOG IN TO REPLY
maverick75
Cream of the Crop
Joined May 2012
Riverside,California
Jul 21, 2013 00:15 |  #12

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 (external link) - 500px (external link) - Website (external link)- Feedback -Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
ElectronGuru
Senior Member
ElectronGuru's Avatar
421 posts
Joined Apr 2009
Oregon
Jul 21, 2013 09:03 |  #13

maverick75 wrote in post #16139002external link
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.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
maverick75
Cream of the Crop
Joined May 2012
Riverside,California
Jul 21, 2013 17:19 |  #14

Well all know aperture is not the only thing that controls DOF....


- Alex Corona
Flickr (external link) - 500px (external link) - Website (external link)- Feedback -Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
Rstanford
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
181 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Jul 21, 2013 21:33 |  #15

It also improves sharpness in the center.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1,633 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why no focal reducer
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00083 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is TeleCloggy
693 guests, 609 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 5577, that happened on Mar 02, 2016