07-20-2015, 12:00 PM
It would be interesting to work through some scenarios, but it depends on the exact optical criteria. For example, it may be easier to get an equivalent depth of field in a smaller package if you were to use a smaller sensor but faster optics. Here we have a maximum body size stated, and requirements for moderate wide + portrait? What would that be? 35/85 equivalents? What aperture would you need on the long end?
I suspect it would be easier to make something with perhaps a MFT or smaller sensor, and use faster optics to compensate for it. If you're really clever, use a folded light path to put more of the lens in the body. If the quality of this lens doesn't satisfy, find some old lens with similar problems and pretend it is a replica of that. At least retro inspired designs seem popular to some.
I suspect it would be easier to make something with perhaps a MFT or smaller sensor, and use faster optics to compensate for it. If you're really clever, use a folded light path to put more of the lens in the body. If the quality of this lens doesn't satisfy, find some old lens with similar problems and pretend it is a replica of that. At least retro inspired designs seem popular to some.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.