The front glass on my M35f2.0 seems to be about an inch even. I don't
have any precision measuring gear to available to be more precise.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>I'm talking about the lens diameter, not the barrel diameter. For example,
>the diameter of the front element of my 35mm Summicron (f/2.0) is about
>1-inch while the front element of my Pentax 35mm f/2.0 is 1.5-inches. I'd
>be curious what the diameter of the front element is on an M or A 35mm 2.0
>... anybody got that figure?
>
>You mention "later design." That implies that the lens diameter (just the
>glass) is smaller than earlier models. If that's the case, then it should
>be possible to design a smaller diameter lens for a DA than for film - at
>least that's one way to look at it.
>
>Shel
>
>
>
>
>
>>[Original Message]
>>From: Adam Maas
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>Shel, They are, because they have a far simpler aperture design. No
>>aperture coupling or full-aperture mechanism is required for an RF lens,
>>not to mention a smaller-diameter mount (which allows smaller-diameter
>>barrels). But even so, fast RF glass isn't all that much smaller than a
>>Pentax 50mm f1.4 of SMC-M or later design.
>>
>>-Adam
>>
>>
>>Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'm not sure that's correct ... I'll have to check the diameter of my
>>>
>>>
>Leica
>
>
>>>glass. It seems to me that the lenses for my Leica, compared to the
>>>
>>>
>same
>
>
>>>focal length/aperture of my Pentax glass, are smaller.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler.
--Albert Einstein
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
