Nick Mavropoulos
June 17th, 2007, 02:02 PM
I will be looking into getting a MB in the near future and wanted to think out loud for a moment. If I'm mistaken in my thinking please let me know.
It's my understanding that a MB out to be as deep as possible without introducing any vignetting. Having said that, a MB that is optimally deep enough for, say, a 85mm lens ought to vignette when used, in the same configuration, on a 50mm lens. If you throw in the fact that some lenses project their image on a 4:3 CCD while others (HVX) use a 16:9 CCD, a MB optimally configured for one lens on a 4:3 cam (e.g. DVX) ought to show vignetting when put on a 16:9 cam (HVX) even at the same focal length.
Which brings me to my next thought.
Are the MB's that dvxuser's generally purchase manufactured to spec's that make them work optimally with a specific cam? Actually, the question REALLY should be if the MB is made to work best for a given focal length coupled with a specific imager size? If this is so, and I suspect it may be, it appears logical to me that the manufacturer would build their MB to work best at the widest setting (smallest focal length) of a given cam in order to minimize the possibility of vignetting. This, of course, is a compromise because the optimal MB setup for a specific cam at 10mm may not be the optimal MB setup for the same cam at 80mm. In the latter case, the MB should be deeper. I suspect this very issue is part of what the additional flaps on a non-bellows MB are meant to address.
Are non-bellows MB's (such as the Chrosziel and its ilk) designed to work optimally with a specific camera, at that cameras widest setting?
Are the MB flaps intended to further optimize what may be a far from optimal default MB configuration?
I think its worth asking these questions before plunking down the potentially sizable cash for a MB.
Thanks all,
Nick
It's my understanding that a MB out to be as deep as possible without introducing any vignetting. Having said that, a MB that is optimally deep enough for, say, a 85mm lens ought to vignette when used, in the same configuration, on a 50mm lens. If you throw in the fact that some lenses project their image on a 4:3 CCD while others (HVX) use a 16:9 CCD, a MB optimally configured for one lens on a 4:3 cam (e.g. DVX) ought to show vignetting when put on a 16:9 cam (HVX) even at the same focal length.
Which brings me to my next thought.
Are the MB's that dvxuser's generally purchase manufactured to spec's that make them work optimally with a specific cam? Actually, the question REALLY should be if the MB is made to work best for a given focal length coupled with a specific imager size? If this is so, and I suspect it may be, it appears logical to me that the manufacturer would build their MB to work best at the widest setting (smallest focal length) of a given cam in order to minimize the possibility of vignetting. This, of course, is a compromise because the optimal MB setup for a specific cam at 10mm may not be the optimal MB setup for the same cam at 80mm. In the latter case, the MB should be deeper. I suspect this very issue is part of what the additional flaps on a non-bellows MB are meant to address.
Are non-bellows MB's (such as the Chrosziel and its ilk) designed to work optimally with a specific camera, at that cameras widest setting?
Are the MB flaps intended to further optimize what may be a far from optimal default MB configuration?
I think its worth asking these questions before plunking down the potentially sizable cash for a MB.
Thanks all,
Nick