Chuck, no one actually read it because the picture
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Normal_Lenses_7253.jpg> has a Zeiss
sharp and contrasty at the front of the group, and the Zuiko was far
back, 'though the .jpg has a nice and blurry soft bokeh.
It should be at the front, maybe the Zuiko 50 Macro ƒ/2 instead. ;-)
Did I misunderstood what you had said, or was it you who wrote the
article, or part of it?
I didn't read it, but printed as .pdf and downloaded it. Must first
find the time to read it.
I'm still puzzled with the cone and its diameter ....
Fernando.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Chuck Norcutt
<chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is basically what I said in my *very first* post on this subject
> quoting the Wiki article here:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_lens> which says in part:
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> A lens with a focal length about equal to the diagonal size of the film
> or sensor format is known as a normal lens; its angle of view is similar
> to the angle subtended by a large-enough print viewed at a typical
> viewing distance equal to the print diagonal; this angle of view is
> about 53° diagonally.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> I suspect no one actually read it. :-)
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
