| Subject: | Re: Human vision (no OM content) (was Re: [OM] 100 f2.8 vs 85 f2) |
|---|---|
| From: | *- DORIS FANG -* <sfsttj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 11 Sep 1998 11:04:35 -0400 (EDT) |
On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Ken Norton wrote:
> Does lens vision and human vision haft to match?
They can't. Another bit for this discussion... I remember reading
(in Camera 35) Ernst Haas saying that he had chosen Leica because,
"like the human eye, they're not too sharp". Go figure...
*= Doris Fang =*
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] RE : (OM) XA, *- DORIS FANG -* |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [OM] Who "should" own an OM camera?, PCACala |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Human vision (no OM content) (was Re: [OM] 100 f2.8 vs 85 f2), Ken Norton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Human vision (no OM content) (was Re: [OM] 100 f2.8 vs 85 f2), Oleg Volk |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |