>>4444176>So fine for 35mm film, but too small for full frame digital. Right.Correct.
For example, Nikon's engineers were incapable of creating an electrochipped 58/1.4 lens on the F mount. It took years for Cosina to figure it out decades later, and as such the Voigtlander 58/1.4 is hailed as a marvel of working around engineering constraints.
Why do you think there were no F mount lenses faster than f/1.4 after Nikon introduced autofocus and electronic communication? And the same for Pentax? These mounts are fine for film, but too small for digital. They just couldn't put any electronic communication pins on the back of the lens at speeds faster than f/1.4. It physically did not fit.
Sony's engineers had to (to their credit - a great feat of engineering) do some black magic to make everything fit. That includes optical fuckery that allows them to make fast lenses to the GM standard. However, the downside is that the lens-to-sensor relationship is tighter than other mounts, meaning that going outside of the system (adapting) reveals the compromises that had to be made.
Simple as. I'm not a Sony hater (actually I wish all manufacturers would be as open with their mount licensing as Sony), I just hate to see braindead fucks coping about their purchase with unequivocally false statements. Sony has merits, adapting is just not one of them.
