Lens to sensor distance.

[loosecanon]

When Olympus etc. launched the 4/3 format one of the advantages they preached was the angle at which light from the exit pupil of the lens hit the sensor. Using old lenses on a larger sensor resulted, so they said, in loss of resolution etc. etc.
Interesting to observe that with the micro 4/3 format they don't say the lens is very close to the sensor and so gives an inferior image as the angle of the light rays hitting the sensor is much wider.

So to my question. Would an older 4/3 lens and adaptor on a micro 4/3 camera give a better image, or have micro lenses been introduced to accept the wider angle rays hitting the sensor. If so does it improve IQ over that which can be obtained from the older lenses, which of course will have light rays at a narrower angle than the sensor expects?

I don't know, but marketing is a funny thing.

[Shadowman]

Can't really say as I usually shot handheld with the older 4/3 lens/adapter/micro 4/3 camera. I'll give it another shot weather permitting. What comparison I did attempt was above setup versus DSLR (same focal length) and the problem I encountered on both were due to the distance of the object being photographed. I will say that the two camera setups provided very similar results. I'll try to locate the images and post. I'll have to redo that setup as well at a shorter distance to subject.

[Manfred M]

From an optical standpoint, the lens designer always had to take into account the mirror clearance when designing a (D)SLR lens. Rather than having a small simple design at the exit, a larger diameter and more complex design is to have the light bend to hit the sensor. This introduces more abberations, that have to be corrected through the addition of more optical elements.

Take a look at one of the rangerfinder Leica M lenses and compare its size and weight to an equivilent focal length lens / maximum aperture on a full-frame DSLR and you'll see what I mean. With no mirror to worry about the M lenses sit just in front of the camera's shutter.

A similar argument can be made for 4/3 versus m4/3 (MFT). The original 4/3 concept was for a SLR camera, so the lens was designed to clear the mirror box of the camera. The MFT uses the same size of sensor as the 4/3, but with the mirrorless design; so we have the same argument of the rangefinder versus DSLR applies; with all things being equal, a 4/3 lens will not be as good as a MFT lens on a MFT camera because of the issues associated with the nodal point being further away from the sensor.