Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Feb 4, 2013 at 19:21 comment added Edgar Bonet Another difference is that macro lenses are optimized for short subject distances. Aberrations are dependent on the focusing distance, and a non-macro lens could be very good at the intended distances, and yet poor when used with an extension tube.
Feb 4, 2013 at 18:40 vote accept user1266515
Feb 4, 2013 at 16:53 comment added Matt Grum @user1266515 Field curvature depends on the refractive index of the optical glass used in the lens and the presence of corrective elements, and is naturally less prevalent in telephoto designs.
Feb 4, 2013 at 16:48 comment added user1266515 Perfect! Additionally any idea on which aspect of the physical lens design your comment "macro lenses are usually optimised to have a flat field" addresses?
Feb 4, 2013 at 16:42 comment added Matt Grum @user1266515 ok I get you now, I've edited the question as the key distance is between the rear principal plane and the sensor. The position of the front element does influence the position of the rear principal plane, but so does the position of every other element in the lens, so I've left it as simply "distances between the lens and the sensor".
Feb 4, 2013 at 16:36 comment added user1266515 Thanks for the input! Btw by "....certain distances between the frontal lens element and the sensor" I meant that in all macro lenses generally the lens itself is positioned farther from the sensor. This is the same as using extension tubes or bellows (on a regular/simple lens) which in turn reduce the minimum focusing distance required between the lens and the subject. Hope this makes sense :)
Feb 4, 2013 at 16:27 history edited Matt Grum CC BY-SA 3.0
added 263 characters in body
Feb 4, 2013 at 16:17 history edited Matt Grum CC BY-SA 3.0
added 470 characters in body
Feb 4, 2013 at 16:05 history answered Matt Grum CC BY-SA 3.0