mirror less microlens

[loosecanon]

I recently read that Canon have to use a differnt microlens setup on mirrorless cameras to account for the different incidence angle of light onto the sensor.
Does this mean using existing lenses via an adaptor on such cameras will give a poorer image than on an slr with microlenses optimised for existing lenses?

[xpatUSA]

I recently read that Canon have to use a different microlens setup on mirrorless cameras to account for the different incidence angle of light onto the sensor.

Makes sense. I can confirm that this is the case between the Sigma SD14 DSLR and the Sigma DP1 mirror-less compact model. Both cameras use the same sensor size and design (1.7 crop) but their sensors have different part numbers due to the micro-lens angle variations.

Does this mean using existing lenses via an adaptor on such cameras will give a poorer image than on an slr with microlenses optimised for existing lenses?

As to a "poorer image" I don't know anything about Canon but would comment that the current trend is more toward software correction for such stuff ...

[TonyW]

I would have thought that the angle of incidence of the light on the sensor depends on the focal length of the lens and aperture. I don't understand why the existence of a mirror makes a difference.

[DanK]

I would have thought that the angle of incidence of the light on the sensor depends on the focal length of the lens and aperture. I don't understand why the existence of a mirror makes a difference.

The mirror itself can’t matter, since it isn’t in the light path when the exposure is taken. I’m guessing that the issue is the reduced flange distance.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Manfred M]

My understanding is that getting the rear lens elements as close to the film / sensor plane reduces issues associated with different wavelengths focusing in front or behind the sensor plane. The mirror swing dictates how close the end of the lens can get to the sensor plane, so by removing the mirror, this lens design issue is reduced.

By moving the rear elements of the lens closer to the sensor plane, the light travels at a far more acute angle, so the microlenses must be designed to capture this light coming in at a more acute angle. This is especially the case for wide angle lenses and less of an issue with lenses that have longer focal lengths.

This is not something that just affects Canon cameras, but also any other mirrorless camera. While adapters exist to take existing Canon (and Nikon) DSLR lenses, they will not perform as well as the new lens lines designed specifically for mirrorless bodies. I would expect current Canon EM mount lenses to give better results on DSLRs than they will on the new mirrorless bodies, specifically because the microlenses will have been optimized for the RF mount lenses.

[george013]

I recently read that Canon have to use a differnt microlens setup on mirrorless cameras to account for the different incidence angle of light onto the sensor.
Does this mean using existing lenses via an adaptor on such cameras will give a poorer image than on an slr with microlenses optimised for existing lenses?

Can we read that article ourselves? It's hard to discuss something what you read or thought to read.

George

[dje]

I recently read that Canon have to use a differnt microlens setup on mirrorless cameras to account for the different incidence angle of light onto the sensor.
Does this mean using existing lenses via an adaptor on such cameras will give a poorer image than on an slr with microlenses optimised for existing lenses?

You've touched on a fairly complex subject and one for which little detail is likely to be supplied by the camera manufacturers. I've read some fairly robust discussions on this sort of thing amongst the heavy hitters on the DPReview forums and one thing suggested is that the microlens optimisation involves offsetting the microlenses on the outer parts of the sensor which improves the angular pixel response by a few degrees. If this is the case, it seems to me that use of EFS lenses via an adaptor is unlikely to have any serious consequences. After all, the adaptor just places the EFS lens at it's normal distance from the sensor. But I have no expertise on this subject!

Dave