Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Re: ( OM ) Was megapixel madness

Subject: Re: [OM] Re: ( OM ) Was megapixel madness
From: "Paul D. Farrar" <farrar@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 19:57:59 -0500
A diffraction-limited f/0.8, or so, might be able to pull it off on-axis. I
don't know if
anyone's ever done that. There might be some military or scientific
instruments, which are not suable for ordinary photography. Conventional
photographic lenses rarely get past 100 cycles/ mm at any usable modulation
transfer (5%, or so).

Paul Farrar

----- Original Message -----
From: "Winsor Crosby" <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Re: ( OM ) Was megapixel madness


> >on 9/14/02 2:27 PM, Brian Swale at bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> >>  Winsor Crosby wrote:, forwarded by Moose
> >>
> >>>  It is well known that 35mm lenses are sharper than medium format and
> >>>  large format lenses.
> >>
> >>  Hi folks; not necessarily true.  The Zeiss Sonnar 250mm SuperAchromat
CFi
> >>  lens for Hasslefree is reputed to be the sharpest lens in current
> >>production;
> >>  capable of delivering 600 (I think it is, should look it up) lines per
(
> >>  mm/inch I
> >>  need to look up again). This topic came up about 9 months ago when we
> >>  talked over the maximum detail that film could record.  Whether it is
lines
> >>  per
> >>  mm or inch, it is still away better than any lens most people have.
And it
> >>  should be possible to fit it to an OM body.
> >
> >I remember that... probably should be 600lp/mm, because 600lp/inch is
only
> >about 40lp/mm, which isn't all that impressive. I remember seeing
somewhere
> >that the typical Pen F lens was capable of pretty impressive resolution,
> >something like 80lp/mm or more... the supposed need to provide more
> >resolution due to the smaller film format resulted in some pretty
> >high-quality designs.
> >--
> >
> >Jim Brokaw
> >OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney...
>
> Unfortunately none of this makes any sense. Since 80 lines per mm is
> generally considered to be superb lens resolution I really doubt that
> Zeiss has discovered some alternative physics that produces 8 times
> the resolution of the best of any other manufacturers product.
>
> There are 25.4mm per inch. 600 lines per inch would convert to 23
> lines per mm which is not really good by anyone's standard.  However
> it would probably put a nice image on large format film.
>
> Maybe you guys need to double check things?  :-)
> --
> Winsor Crosby
> Long Beach, California
>
>
> < 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 >
>


< 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>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz