Buying guides 2015

News Reviews Articles Buying Guide Sample Images Videos Cameras LensesPhonesPrinters Forums Galleries Challenges

136

CP+ 2016: Things we found that had been cut in half

Published Feb 29, 2016 | Barney Britton

…

CP+ 2016: Things we found that had been cut in half

'I don't know, Rishi', I said in the press room, over warm coffee from a warm can. 'I don't know if I should do another 'things we found that had been cut in half' slideshow.' Rishi was silent. I went on: 'Is it even funny? And there aren't that many things at the show this year which have been cut in half. Mostly I've just seen things which are whole. I don't know whether I should do it'.

Rishi looked up. There was pain in his eyes. Confusion. The confusion of a child who's starting to suspect that Santa doesn't exist but isn't ready to believe it.

His normally whisper-quiet voice rose slightly. 'You have to do it' he said, almost pleading. His voice became louder still - 'You have to do it. Not because it's funny - Barney, listen to me. It's not funny. It has never been funny. But that's not why you do it. You do it because it's tradition.'

'Dammit, Rishi' I said, straightening in my chair and in the same motion, banging my knees against the oddly low desk, 'You're right. And stop yelling, you're freaking me out'.

Tags: cp-plus-2016, humor

Gear in this story


Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro	Pentax K-1
7 I own it 43 I want it 7 I had it Discuss in the forums	18 I own it 587 I want it 17 I had it Discuss in the forums

Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS	Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM
6 I own it 206 I want it 14 I had it Discuss in the forums	12 I own it 328 I want it 16 I had it Discuss in the forums

Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM	Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 300mm F4 IS Pro
4 I own it 260 I want it 15 I had it Discuss in the forums	27 I own it 184 I want it 12 I had it Discuss in the forums

Nikon D5	Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH Power OIS
34 I own it 323 I want it 42 I had it Discuss in the forums	10 I own it 156 I want it 6 I had it Discuss in the forums

Voigtlander VM 40mm F2.8 Heliar
9 I own it 8 I want it 2 I had it Discuss in the forums

Body (CF Version), Base	Pre-order now	From $6,496.95	Shop now
Body (XQD Version), Base	Pre-order now	From $6,496.95	Shop now

Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Lens

Pre-order now

$2,198.00

Shop now

Sony FE 85mm f/1.4 GM Lens

Pre-order now

$1,798.00

Shop now

Panasonic H-RS100400 Lumix Leica Vario-Elmar Lens, 100-400mm (Black)

Pre-order now

$1,797.99

Shop now

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm f4.0 PRO Lens (Black)

In stock

$2,499.99

Shop now

Canon	In stock	$649.00	Shop now
Nikon	In stock	$649.00	Shop now

Pentax K-1 Full Frame DSLR Camera (Body Only)

Pre-order now

$1,796.95

Shop now

1 customer review

Voigtlander VM 40mm f/2.8 Heliar Manual Focus Lens Sony E-Mount

In stock

$399.00

Shop now

	Nikon D3300 DSLR HD Grey Camera, 18-55mm Lens, 55-200mm Lens and Case Bundle	$596.95
	Nikon D7200 DX-Format 24.2MP Digital HD-SLR Body with 18-55mm VR Lens Bundle	$1196.95
	Nikon D7200 DX-format Black Digital SLR Camera w/ 18-140mm and 70-300mm Lens Bundle	$1546.90

Comments

Total comments: 136

Can anyone tell me what the purpose of those VERY thick single elements ? The location of these very thick (the 2 I noticed did not have complex 'face' shapes, just very thick) lens elements are certainly not for structural strength either.

I mostly thought that it was really the 'face' curves, whether symmetrical or asymmetrical, and it was the material coefficient of refraction, etc that made for the strength of the total refraction.

So is this thickness part of color correction or a 'cheaper' manor to attain a particular refraction value ??

Thx for the explanation !!

0 upvotes

Nearly everything was cut in half. Thank God they spared Rishi.

1 upvote

Too many lenses: I wanted to see Damien Hirst cut in half.

0 upvotes

Um. There's romex without a sheath in that power strip. Is that homemade?

0 upvotes

While the original mercury style batteries aren't around for the Canon F1 (and others from that time period), there are non-mercury alternatives that work just fine. I own a few cameras from that time (including an F1) and have taken many pictures with modern alternative batteries.

0 upvotes

What I would like to know now, is HOW those lenses have been cut. I guess you don't just pick a saw and cut...
Also some look "cleaner" than others... Filed, maybe?

0 upvotes

they just shut down the lens machine exactly half-way through its cycle.

4 upvotes

Two in one or maybe better - one in two

0 upvotes

Where is your second half article?

4 upvotes

Here's a funny joke: lenses and bodies don't work well when they're cut in half! Wait... they already repeated that joke... on every slide...

1 upvote

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You're right!

2 upvotes

Maybe because there are people (like me) who read some of them but just check the photos.They didn't want any of us to miss that joke ^^

"This particular lens is even more complex, being made up of 46 elements in 36 groups."
This one is my fav :D

0 upvotes

Although I think it has a typo. Should be *64* elements in 36 groups, no?

0 upvotes

Chillbert,
mhmm I know there is a typo there...but even with that typo,the joke is clear and it is funny :))

0 upvotes

What do they use to stick them back together?

0 upvotes

Pic 15: do I see just 3 elements. It's so simple!

0 upvotes

I think you're missing the elements that are directly against each other. I count 5.

0 upvotes

I see.

0 upvotes

Seeing lenses cut in half is interesting. However, I don't get the point of seeing cameras cut in half. What's the point? Don't they all look the same anyway!
I would rather like to see each corresponding component laid flat explained and displayed instead.

0 upvotes

As consolation: I've read (and been told) that the equipment being cut in half frequently have issues that prevent their use (e.g. didn't pass QC, DOA camera, etc).

1 upvote

I noted one little thing that I find a bit peculiar:
The Tamron 90 macro & the Panasonic/Leica 100-400 did seem to have almost glossy surfaces on the insides of the "tubes". Would that not result in unnecessary reflections?

0 upvotes

I've been looking forward to this all week!

0 upvotes

and Rishi has half a laptop!

1 upvote

... Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 300mm F4 IS Pro, which offers an equivalent focal length of 600mm in full-frame terms...

Er, no. This one is only 300mm FF equivalent ... it's cut in half

6 upvotes

Pretty sure that the Sony 70-200 F2.8 has 64 elements (32 x 2) when cut in half (instead of 46 written in the article)... unless my brain is cut in half and I can't do math.

0 upvotes

Looks like it was…

It is 46. (Same misprint repeated again and again…)

0 upvotes

BTW, to DP Review, keep searching out things cut in half. It's become such a cliche it's worth a laugh.

0 upvotes

Thanks, Barney, for the wonderful Monday morning pick-me-up :)

0 upvotes

You see Barney? You're literally an antidepressant now. You wouldn't want to withhold that now in some overtly Shkrelian maneuver now would you? :)

0 upvotes

Your Sigma lenses should have held together better.

0 upvotes

I have to say I'm a little disappointed in this post. Haven't we said for years that it's not the camera that matters, it's the photographer? Couldn't you find a single photographer who was cut in half for this show? Oh well, maybe next year.

10 upvotes

Thanks for the laugh.

0 upvotes

See last picture.

0 upvotes

That would be a thing for Gunther von Hagens. Or did he do that allready?

0 upvotes

I think these pix are fake. I took the finest hacksaw I have and cut my D810 in half, and the damned pieces fell all over the place. Same thing happened to the lenses I tried to slice.

5 upvotes

you have to enable mirror lockup before.

8 upvotes

Dammit. NP, I'll order a few more D810s and let you know how it goes. Question: should VR be on or off during the cutting on the lenses?

2 upvotes

VR should only be enabled on the saw itself. good luck!

0 upvotes

Har har har. Keep your day job.

There is a long tradition of cutaways in optics as well as other fields, not related to humor, even third rate humor. Expand your background knowledge, whippersnapper.

I have always wondered where these things end up, I would love to have one.

Keep it up!

0 upvotes

These are not, technically cut-aways -drawings where the inner-workings are revealed, not just cut in half, You are old enough to know the difference ;)

0 upvotes

I had no idea cameras were made in halves? Am going to inspect mine with a magnifier to see if I can find the seams.😀

1 upvote

I would like to see a video of how this is actually done.

8 upvotes

Indeed. Now THAT would be a REAL story.

2 upvotes

Like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jruSfx3ztjw

(found from comments below)

2 upvotes

After witnessing all this perversity, I think it's time to create the SPCCL, Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Cameras and Lenses, similar to the SPCA.

1 upvote

I love seeing the inside of the lens.. not so keen on the reminder in every caption that its a cut-away.

1 upvote

any sign of camera makers cutting prices in half? :)

11 upvotes

Dream on, you fool.

0 upvotes

Darn it nunatak, I wanted to make that joke. :(
Here it is, anyway, now only half as funny:

"Did you see any Nikon prices at the show? I'd love to those cut in half."

0 upvotes

Yes! 17 slides of things cut in half (and bonus points from those of us forced to study Latin for years)!

Half is right with the world, again.

2 upvotes

There should be an international moratorium on the barbaric practice of cutting cameras in half. Watching the slideshow, I was almost brought to tears.

1 upvote

Well, it IS interesting! Kind of like rubber necking at an auto accident!

btw Barney, with that intro, I think you are ready for your first novel.

0 upvotes

After looking how complex lenses and cameras are inside, and how difficult is the engineering of those photographic tools, im thinking that we as consumers, should consider the FF cameras and the exotic prime lenses as real bargain. Hey nikon you should rise the prices of your top dslrs and lenses. Great job, take my money!!

Edited 3 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Someone is going straight to hell for slicing a Nikon F in half.

2 upvotes

I suspect that if that's true, the guilty party has been in hell since the early 1960s.

2 upvotes

I don't know why, but I find this old Nikon F and Canon F-1 much more nicely engineered.
Somehow they look much more clean, solid and passionately designed. Of course to some extent this is due to the actual technology being much simpler.

1 upvote

"much more clean, solid and passionately designed." LOL, talk about ridiculous romanticizing! Yes, they are "more clean" because they barely have anything to them. More "solid"? Maybe yes, maybe no, but there's no way of telling that from these cut-aways. But I think today's cameras, especially pro bodies are more structurally advanced and structurally stronger because manufacturers have had decades to refine these designs. As for being more "passionately designed"...that's extreme romanticizing. With these older cameras, there wasn't much designing needed. They were basically just squarish light-tight boxes. Very few controls, very few ergonomic considerations...just not a whole lot of "design" to do "passionately. In comparison, today's cameras have a huge amount of design considerations required of them.

Edited 2 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

@T3
You don't actually know what you're talking about. Are you an engineer at all, or some sort of "romantic" literature enthusiast trying to sound funny?

Even 25 years ago people would have designed these cameras drawing on paper and making calculations by hand. Can you even calculate the cosine of an angle or square root of without a computer or a calculator. I am convinced 99% of Americans today can't do it even with a computer.

Today we draw and design on a computer, can visualise any element we want in seconds, test the strength, run simulations with static and dynamic loads, electronic circuitry, electromagnetic fields, etc. We even have metal 3D printing and can design, print and test in hours.

Imagine how much time was needed 60 years ago, when all of this had to be envisioned, drawn and designed on paper, parts sized using hand calculations.

1 upvote

Even engineering information, today you can find in seconds on the internet, in PDF format, or even videos. 60 years ago you had to find a paper book in a library somewhere, go through it just to find some formulas.

I am not surprised that an American thinks the way you do actually. Your country has only 200 years of history at the end of the day.

1 upvote

Ha! What do you know about Americans?

Big percentage of them has 6,000 years of history!

0 upvotes

This article is half perfect ... ;)

3 upvotes

I really enjoyed reading your article,Barney. :-)

1 upvote

Missing a disclaimer "Remember kids, this cut-out are made by profesionnal, don't do this at home with your dad's or mom's camera" :)

3 upvotes

It's incredible to see that these cutouts were done using extremely high pressure jets of water...

1 upvote

Were they ?

0 upvotes

most likely, yes. see my link below.

0 upvotes

Ah haa - impressive...

0 upvotes

I would like to see an article by Roger Cicala putting one of these lenses back together again . . . and then taking sample pictures with it . . . while commenting on what he sees some people doing to lenses . . . and that this is nothing.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)

Edited 26 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

how do they do it? most likely a waterjet cutter.

if you dont mind seeing a Canon 500 being halfed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jruSfx3ztjw

3 upvotes

Cool! Thanks for sharing. But if you should use waterjet cutter only on weather-sealed cameras and lenses! Otherwise you lose the manufacturer's warranty...

4 upvotes

Marvelous how they can cut cameras and lenses in half. Wouldn't it be absolutely amazing if they were able to cut the cost of products in half as well?

0 upvotes

Cutting in half the retail price is much more interesting...

1 upvote

I am sure they would be totally happy to sell you one of those half cameras for half price!

1 upvote

These half lenses are perfect for the old Pen F...

1 upvote

How about an article on how they cut lenses in half, I guess there are several approaches? Do they cut the metal bits in one go, the lens elements separately/individually and then slot them in from the side?

I'm just glad I'm not the guy who has to attach a half-lens to a half-camera, as it must play havoc with the mount... (The Nikon lens on the D5 did look like it had been cut-in-half for a previous show.)

Oh and of course never stop doing these...

0 upvotes

You're slipping Barney. There are two photos here that don't contain anything that's cut in half :/

0 upvotes

"..and features a new XA (extreme aspherical) element which has been rendered even more aspherical in this lens by being cut in half."

This was my favourite of them all - along with "ugly bokeh".

Thanks for the humor, and Rishi was right - you've *got* to keep this going!

8 upvotes

And for the record, I laughed out loud while reading this slideshow. And yes, that was probably my favorite one as well. :)

8 upvotes

More seriously, would it be remotely possible to grind (form?) just a single aspherical lens, in such a way that this element is the only optic required in a lens?

0 upvotes

@Flashback,
For a prime lens maybe, for a zoom lens I am afraid engineers have to invent an aspherical and deformable lens...

0 upvotes

@Flashback
It's possible but aberrations and sharpness would be an issue.
That said, the world is full of 2-elements lenses (achromatic doublet).
Pentax made a 2-elements lens, the 85mm f/2.2. Very, very soft, made for portraits.
Leica made the Leica Telyt 400mm f/6.8, but there are a lot of 400-500mm lenses made with only an achromatic doublet.

0 upvotes

>Kamox

Thanks for your comments.
What a lovely 'techy' name, achromatic doublet:)

0 upvotes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visby_lenses It it said that two of them are pretty good. Very low spherical abberation and low distortion almost to the edge. But I think you can not correct chromathic abberation with just one lens.

0 upvotes

1-element lens is very easy to design — at least if you have a material with VERY high refraction index not depending on wavelength.

The best lens is going to be very thin, going along the sphere. Radius = focal length, center is in the center of image.

This design has f-number up to f/0.5, no spherical aberration, and no coma — but it has very strong astigmatism: the tangential/saggital curvature of field are: flat vs focal length.

From this description, it is very easy to calculate the ellipses of confusion. So this design may be good for supertelephoto only…

0 upvotes

>ilza

I am thinking that maybe the astigmatism and curvature could be corrected in software?

0 upvotes

I thought a spherical lens would inavitably have spherical abarration. Thats why it is called spherical aberration. The focal lenght of an spherical lens depends on the distants from the center of the lens. And all the other abberations, coma, astigmatism, curvature of field, distortion are inherrant for spherical lenses. The best you can get with a single lens is the combination of a two aspherical surfaces like the design of the Visby lenses.

0 upvotes

You forgot to mention FF DSLR prices - they were cut in half by the K-1 at CP+ 2016 ;)

5 upvotes

Were they? Nikon D610, Canon 6D..

3 upvotes

Did you check prices of those Pentax branded Tamron lenses?

Nikon D750 DSLR Camera Body with Storage Kit=2000 USD

Nikon D750 DSLR Camera with 24-120mm Lens and Storage Kit=2300 USD
Pentax K 1 body USD

Pentax HD PENTAX-D FA 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 =500 USD

Pentax 15-30 2.8=1450 USD

Same lens by Tamron;
Tamron 15-30 VC for Nikon=1200 USD (despite it has VC in it)

Pentax 24-70 2.8=1300 USD

Same lens Tamron branded
Tamron 24-70 2.8 for Nikon = 1200 USD

Pentax 77mm 1.8=700 USD
Nikon 85mm 1.8 G=480 USD

Pentax 70-200 2.8 =2300 USD
Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II=2100 USD

Canon is even little bit cheaper!..But I wouldn't buy Canon 6D with its aged AF (I am sure still better than Pentax thou).

So please don't say Pentax is cheaper!

3 upvotes

Xentinus the K1 has just come out and is at full RRP and you are comparing it to a D750 that is at a discounted price. The K1 also has the same sensor size as the D810 not the D750.

1 upvote

@Xentinus - When trying to make a point always be careful not to make incorrect analysis as you did:

A) You compare a 36 mp camera to cameras that need 50% more pixels to match the K-1 resolution.

B) You compare the prices of a product that is not yet released and the prices of cameras that are several years old and have seen most of their sales already.

C) You compare the K-1 to cameras lacking quite a few of the function that K-1 users are going to enjoy daily.

I shoot landscapes and cityscapes - there is currently no Nikon or Canon camera that will match the microcontrast and the chroma resolution of a K-1 shot made with using Pixel-Shift! It is that simple, even if I was willing to pay more for them...

1 upvote

Stu 5,
K1's sensor size is the same as D750...They are both full-frame cameras.
If u are talking about megapixel,yes D8x0 has the same 36 mp sensor.
The only thing K1 has equal to D800 or D810 is megapixel...For the rest you can not compare them.
Do you think people would be between K1 or D810? :)

My point is simple,I explained above...Buy Pentax for a better reason,not for its price!

Last thing;
When you miss focus slightly on relatively low resolution camera,you will not notice...But when you miss focus just a tiny bit on a 36mp camera,you will curse its AF ability ;)
So If Pentax was a 24 mp camera,it was better for them.

If Ricoh-Pentax wanna play this game,they have to solve their AF problem really!...Anytime when Pentax releases new camera,Pentaxians have said "this time they have solved".

I would buy Pentax K1,if I was into landscape photography or I would buy it for 43mm and 77 mm combo (I wouldnt expect proper AF thou).For the rest D750 is better choice FOR ME.

2 upvotes

Yanko Kitanov,
Read what YOU YOURSELF have written first!
You said "You forgot to mention FF DSLR prices - they were cut in half by the K-1 at CP+ 2016 ;)"
Now reconsider your point!
Next time instead of stealing Stu 5's words,have your own words!

You claimed that FF DSLR prices are cut half by Pentax!!
No,the truth is;they are cut by D600 and 6D!
But still I didn't compare it with D610/600 or 6D.

2 upvotes

@Xentinus
I recommend you read my previous answer several times and breath deeply - relax.

All the best.

1 upvote

Missing focus has the same effect no matter the amount of pixels if you are printing to the same size/viewing at the same size on the screen. It only seems worse when you start pixel peeping.

1 upvote

@Tarzan
I shoot Pentax, Nikon, Sony, Canon, Sigma and Leica and have less than 5% missed focus with AF(the same goes for Pentax alone ~5%) and almost never miss it using MF.
Last time when I had to regret I missed a photo due to AF was more than 3 years ago.
How do I do that?

Edited 7 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Yanko,
I am pretty calm don't worry for me!

When I sent my answer for Stu 5,your answer were not there.Prolly there is a lag!
You have no idea what you yourself are talking about!
Your statement was simple (and wrong)...You said with Pentax K1
full-frame camera prices are cut half.Which is (I am being nice) simply not true!
And beside that,I took your attention to the lens prices.Then you started being a fan boy saying that;
"C) You compare the K-1 to cameras lacking quite a few of the function that K-1 users are going to enjoy daily."
I will not argue with you about this...But do know every brand has advantages and disadvantages!
I still have some Pentax equipment...But after missing thousands of photos due to focus issues,I switched to the Nikon.
Now I am able to take photos of dogs running around like crazy with 85mm 1.8 G lens (which is known with its slow autofocus).
cause I have made my expertise with Pentax' stupid AF!

2 upvotes

Xentinus

If my photography demanded that I sacrifice IQ for more points with fast AF tracking or some other assistance to my shooting I would probably not shoot Pentax - just like you.

I wonder how did Ansel Adams or H.C.B. ever work without fast AF tracking? How did my grandad cover the 1948 Olympics incl. all athletics professionally with a Leica IIIc ?

Have lots of fun shooting the dog on a 85mm - I must do some work now.
Cheers!

Edited 14 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Pentax is cheaper.

0 upvotes

Seriously I would like to see photos of those people who are constantly talking about Ansel Adams!
Can I see your photos?

Can you take as good as his photos,even while u have better technology nowadays?

He didn't need AF tracking,and those guys who took photos in Olympic games I really admire them!

I am not making a live with my camera,so I don't need to be as pro as they are.But I can say those old cameras' viewfinders and those old lenses are much easier to focus manually.

But beside all these are you taking JUST landscapes and citiescapes?..wouldn't it be good to be able to have the whole package?
Don't you have kids around you,nieces or nephews?
This is why you assume that K1 is a good camera for everyone?

I already made the point,I will repeat!

I would buy Pentax K1,if I was into landscape photography or I would buy it for 43mm and 77 mm combo (I wouldnt expect proper AF thou).For the rest D750 is better choice FOR ME.

And yes I enjoy photographing things I love!

Cheers!

0 upvotes

Some photos of mine without leaving the forum: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52355196

I use MF lenses mostly - even for the kids - I don't need AF in my workflow.

I will sound strange perhaps but I don't like Pentax limited lenses and not because of AF - the comparatively low resolution, the smaller maximal aperture and the high prices make for a real poor bang for the buck to me personally.

Regarding shooting the dog - my point is that it is easier and more common to shoot pets using a wider lens and not a 85mm no matter the focusing you use. Of course you would love to take pictures of things you love.

0 upvotes

Nice photos of Istanbul!
I have read about MF techniques before (like every Pentaxian does lol)...With a good bright viewfinder,I can take some good photos of moving subjects too.
Pentax also has "catch-in focus" which is cool.I don't know if Nikon or Canon has it.
But the idea,I am trying to get rid of is;to be achieved harder doesn't mean the final output more valuable.I was thinking like that.But now I am trying to change my view-point and use the technology as much as I can.
But while doing that,I still admire people who get the same results (even better) with less.

I have taken really nice action photos with relatively poor K200D + 55-300 combo...But I have missed many as well!
85mm lens I am using for portraits of course...But I have mentioned it with the dog photos because I wanted to emphasize how much difference there is,between Pentax' AF technology and other brands.
I have written that before too,but I want to repeat here;
.......................

0 upvotes

..............................
Even those mirrorless cameras,a6000 and Samsung NX1 have better AF than Pentax.
I don't know why they are not able to solve it!

They have amazing glasses really...I wish Sony had those limited lenses for their mirrorless cameras.

0 upvotes

BTW,despite they are very small sized It is not hard to see that,these photos are not in focus;

http://prnt.sc/a9z8c1

http://prnt.sc/a9z8mj

focus is on shoulders for both photos.

It is probably not because of back-focus issue...It is because Pentax cameras' AF points are TOO big.They are trying to compensate their poor tracking ability by keeping focus points bigger than they supposed to be.And the result is,focus shift to shoulders or ears.

Anyway I can write hundreds of pages for autofocus really,cause while using Pentax as my main camera I had to read and observe too much.But It is not the correct thread to discuss about it.

0 upvotes

Now cut the price of full frame cameras in half!

6 upvotes

This is like the photography version of "threw it on the ground!"

2 upvotes

Just how do they actually do this? How can they get such a clean cut section? Very fine bandsaw blades? It has always puzzled me.

0 upvotes

Either laser or wire cut, these are very expensive machines, but they are precise to mm level.

0 upvotes

Amazing!

0 upvotes

Some of those Sony cuts seem decentred?

5 upvotes

Probably a fine band saw. Definitely not laser or wire cutting as stated above

2 upvotes

I worked for a big automotive supplier, where similar half-cuts were achieved by using fine band saws, as proposed by Ayoh.

0 upvotes

A hacksaw

1 upvote

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/52982953.jpg

0 upvotes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jruSfx3ztjw

1 upvote

That link was copied from GRUBERND post.

0 upvotes

I wonder too and have asked many reps at pro trade shows how this is done and by whom. Apparently a trade secret and know one is willing to talk. I tried Googling this question and learned about powerful water jet tech being used for similar type display models of larger optical and electronic devices. I'll try asking again at NAB where there are many cameras & lenses cut in two.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 136

Editorial content

Product database

Community

About us Work for us Advertise with us FAQ Feedback Interest-Based Ads Privacy Legal

All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.

Mobile site


CP+ 2016: Nikon D5 / D500 - key features you need to know about Mar 3, 2016	Crowd pleaser: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM real world images Mar 10, 2016	Seriously sharp: Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM samples Mar 10, 2016	UPDATED: CP+ 2016: shooting the Pentax K-1 in Yokohama Mar 4, 2016

	No, what's film?
	I don't, but would if it weren't so expensive
	I don't, film is for hipsters
	I shoot the occasional roll
	I like to shoot a mix of film and digital
	I only shoot film, long live analog

129	* This Week Through Your M4/3 2016.03.12 *
57	GX8 Can Not Shoot Birds in Flight! Really? You Decide
53	I can't use zooms anymore
48	Olympus f1.2 primes - will anyone be happy?
48	Who buy Pentax K-1, to take photographs in JPEG format ?
46	**This week with your A7x, 03/12/2016**
45	More "sneaky" updates to promote Win 10
44	Adam admits that d800 af performance is better than k1
42	Is it necessary to have focusing motor in lenses if I have it already in camera body?
41	Need expert advice on shooting the sun at sunset
40	A question to people who have owned A7RII 4+ months
39	* Weekly Wildlife Thread 12th March to 18th March 2016 *
38	I love my X-Pro2, but will probably return it...
38	Why I'm not buying a Pentax K-1...
36	HD 70-200mm - Second set of images - very sharp lens!
35	The Sunday BIRD Volume 11 Issue No. 32, March 13, 2016
33	Talent, vision and full dedication is all that matters!
33	Multiple small capacity SD cards vs Large capacity
32	A7II? much worse than A7rII
32	**Photo of the Week March 11, 2016 - March 18, 2016**