> Prev
From: Paul Carmichael <wibbleypants@gmail.com>
Subject: Physical size of lenses
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Paul Carmichael <wibbleypants@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Physical size of lenses
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 11:09:04 +0100
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <f87fa0Fh1fjU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net D/7L6g9GlPVGAWPXbbQwjA/8e2Gobk/ORvd2ooykd2TQXQ9l0=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Cdc2+rxpdzaHI8JWQscmZEz8Qm8=
X-Mozilla-News-Host: news://news.individual.net:119
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.4.0
Content-Language: es-ES
Print Article
Forward Article
Good morning everyone.

I have a trivial question:

On my desk in front of me are two lenses. Both Samyang primes. One is a 35mm f1.4 and the 
other is an 85mm f1.4.

I'm just curious as to why the 35mm is so much physically longer than the 85mm.

And a related question: I have a Vivitar 35mm f2.8 that fits in the palm of my hand, 
whereas the Samyang is huge. I suspect the answer is obvious, but not to me.

-- 
Paul.

  https://paulc.es/
  https://asetrad.org