I bet no one knows enough to answer THIS question... !
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Performance Issue: Canon Lenses or Camera Body Causing Softer Focus
Next: I bet no one knows enough to answer THIS question... !
From: Bruce on 16 Jul 2010 02:43 On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 07:15:54 +0100, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >"krishnananda" <krishna(a)divine-life.in.invalid> wrote in message >news:krishna-274E80.22554715072010(a)news.eternal-september.org... >[] >> You've got it in a nutshell. If it were possible to mount a lens >> designed for APS-C sized sensors on a "full frame" camera you'd get >> exactly that vignetting. >[] > >"If it were possible"? Quite possible for any Nikon lens user. You beat me to it. ;-)
From: Paul Furman on 16 Jul 2010 03:03 Bruce wrote: > BF wrote: >> worthless > Stupid Thanks for your contribution.
From: Bruce on 16 Jul 2010 05:47 On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:03:26 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote: >Bruce wrote: >> BF wrote: >>> worthless >> Stupid > >Thanks for your contribution. Q: In what way is your contribution any better? A: It isn't.
From: Neil Harrington on 16 Jul 2010 11:33 "Scotius" <yodasbud(a)mnsi.net> wrote in message news:fsms369k0lm01f67vj3at5odi4pmhljdh7(a)4ax.com... > Why is it that camera lenses are round, but pictures are > square? Hmmm? Tell me that ya' smarteys! Because you are standing in a square room when you're taking the pictures. This forces the camera to calculate the cosine of the aspect ratio of the room, take the square root of that and subtract the inverse of the secant, which when divided by the cube of the focal length obviously results in a square picture. All this is basic optics stuff. This is why we have digital cameras today -- they can do these calculations far faster than the old cameras did. If you were standing in a round room, the pictures would be round.
From: Neil Harrington on 16 Jul 2010 11:43
"John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:i1lvnq$qom$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > krishnananda wrote: >> In article <i1loqb$36i$2(a)news.eternal-september.org>, >> John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>> Scotius wrote: >>>> Why is it that camera lenses are round, but pictures are >>>> square? Hmmm? Tell me that ya' smarteys! >>> It's a mystery that'll never, ever be explained. >> >> The Nikon 8mm 180-degree fisheye produces a circular image on rectangular >> film, as do other non-full-frame fisheyes. >> >> But a much more important question is why are hot dogs sold in packs of >> 10 but hot dog buns are sold in packs of 8? >> >> In philosophy this is known as the "Hot Dog Dilemma". > > Roger that! There is one theory that the average klutzy BBQer will drop > two in front of the guests, and have to dispose of them in the garbage > instead of putting 'em back on the grill. Not if he believes in the Five Second Rule. I think it's a conspiracy between hot dog and bun makers to force consumers to buy more product. When the buns are used up the consumer has two hot dogs left over, and has to buy another package of buns. Then when the last two hot dogs are used he has six buns left over. And so on. |