Why aren’t fixed-aperture interchangeable lenses more common?
Asked 1/6/2014
5 views
2 answers
0
If a lens were built with only one aperture instead of an adjustable diaphragm, would it be cheaper, smaller, or more durable? For example, could a fixed-aperture design make very fast or long lenses much more affordable, or are there optical and practical reasons adjustable apertures are preferred on interchangeable-lens cameras?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
12y ago
2 Answers
13
The wider the aperture the more difficult it is to correct for aberrations that reduce sharpness/contrast etc.
When you stop down a fast lens these aberrations simply go away, as you are physically blocking the light that is causing them.
So designing an f/1.8 only lens, is exactly as hard as designing a variable aperture lens with maximum of f/1.8 (plus the minor difficultly of including an iris). However the f/1.8 only lens is much much less useful, for pretty much exactly the same cost, which is why nobody does this with interchangeable lenses.
Early lenses were designed with single apertures as you suggest, but these lenses had a slot into which you could insert pieces of metal with different sized holes to obtain different sized apertures. What you are suggesting is something like this lens, but with the slot glued shut so no-one could use it. Gluing the slot doesn't make the lens cheaper or improve performance in any way.
Some fixed aperture lenses do exist, such as the "lens in a cap" or mirror lenses. Most such lenses have a property in common, they have very small apertures like f/8. In a sense these lenses are already stopped down, adding an extra stop or two wouldn't make much difference, in the case of mirror lenses they are almost always long focal lengths where stopping down would make the lens unusable due to camera shake. For the lens in a cap, well it's a toy lens, adding a variable aperture wouldn't make it into a serious photographic tool, so why bother.
Other lenses that have fixed apertures include camera phone ultra compact cameras. These have sensors that are so small stopping down would cause problems with diffraction.
Finally most scientific, industrial and medical lenses have a fixed aperture as they are designed for a single purpose, so the aperture is fixed at the correct value for that purpose.
Originally by user1375. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1375
12y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Fixed-aperture interchangeable lenses are uncommon because removing the adjustable aperture usually saves very little while making the lens far less useful.
The hard and expensive part of a lens is the optical design and glass needed to control aberrations and keep elements precisely aligned. A variable aperture mechanism is comparatively simple, so replacing it with a fixed opening does not meaningfully reduce cost, size, or fragility.
It also doesn’t make very fast lenses cheap. Designing a lens that works well at f/1.8 or f/1.4 is difficult because wide apertures make aberrations worse. Stopping a fast lens down improves image quality by blocking the problematic outer rays. A lens fixed at its maximum aperture would still need the same demanding optical design, but without the flexibility to stop down for more sharpness, depth of field, or exposure control.
There are some fixed-aperture examples, notably mirror lenses, but they’re a niche because the tradeoff in usefulness is large.
So the main reason they aren’t popular is simple: little practical savings, but a major loss in control.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI12y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why don’t photographic mirror lenses have variable apertures?
Have there been fixed-lens DSLRs, and why are they uncommon?
Why are 50mm prime lenses usually cheaper than other fast primes?
Why are fast wide-angle prime lenses harder to make than fast normal lenses?
Why are ultra-fast built-in camera lenses (f/1.0–f/1.2) so rare?