03-21-2015, 05:36 AM
Hi popo,
The f/0.9 lens is designed over the standard visible spectrum, just as most photographic lenses are. It is designed only for a close focus distance and has no moving elements, but its entire assembly could be moved to refocus, I just don't know what the performance would be like. At infinity it is actually f/0.76 or so according to Code V.
Realistic limits are set by price and physical constraints. For example, a 50mm f/1.0 lens can be designed with 300/2.8L II performance or better, it would just be very very large and heavy, and the rear element probably would need to be much bigger than the throat diameter of F or EF mount. At more reasonably apertures e.g f/2 or even f/1.4, the sky's the limit on performance if you can pay for it.
IL Camera lenses are heavily limited by price, size, and weight limitations so they perform relatively poorly. When the price and size limitations are loosened some, designs such as the 300/2.8L II or its peers emerge.
The f/0.9 lens is designed over the standard visible spectrum, just as most photographic lenses are. It is designed only for a close focus distance and has no moving elements, but its entire assembly could be moved to refocus, I just don't know what the performance would be like. At infinity it is actually f/0.76 or so according to Code V.
Realistic limits are set by price and physical constraints. For example, a 50mm f/1.0 lens can be designed with 300/2.8L II performance or better, it would just be very very large and heavy, and the rear element probably would need to be much bigger than the throat diameter of F or EF mount. At more reasonably apertures e.g f/2 or even f/1.4, the sky's the limit on performance if you can pay for it.
IL Camera lenses are heavily limited by price, size, and weight limitations so they perform relatively poorly. When the price and size limitations are loosened some, designs such as the 300/2.8L II or its peers emerge.