Now, the next BIG contest is ON!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Here Comes the 3-D Camera: Revolutionary Prototype Films Worldin Three Dimensions
Next: Why the Nikon Coolscan V ED is so expensive event on vintage market ?
From: J. Clarke on 23 May 2010 17:06 On 5/23/2010 4:03 PM, DanP wrote: > On 23 May, 18:50, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> DanP<dan.pe...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> On May 23, 3:31 am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >>>> Wrong. Bigger apertures allow higher resolution. That's why big >>>> telescopes are better than tiny ones. >> >>> Telescopes are focused at infinity so that is a different case. >> >> ?!? >> >> Why is that different? >> > > Because their optics are fixed and you want the biggest lens/mirror > you can get. > > Binoculars have focus and if you want a bigger DOF you pick smaller > lenses. The less light you let through the longer the DOF. > > In cameras DOF is a relation of the f number which in turn depends of > the size of the lens and the size of the internal diaphragm. The issue under discussion is not DOF, it's sharpness. So what relevance do you believe DOF to have? Take an optics course sometime and you'll be surprised at how much of what you think you know is wrong.
From: Ray Fischer on 23 May 2010 17:59 DanP <dan.petre(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On 23 May, 18:50, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> DanP �<dan.pe...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >On May 23, 3:31�am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >> >> Wrong. �Bigger apertures allow higher resolution. �That's why big >> >> telescopes are better than tiny ones. >> >> >Telescopes are focused at infinity so that is a different case. >> >> ?!? >> >> Why is that different? > >Because their optics are fixed Nope. >and you want the biggest lens/mirror >you can get. Because bigger means higher resolution. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Paul Furman on 23 May 2010 19:30 Ray Fischer wrote: > DanP <dan.petre(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> On 23 May, 18:50, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>> DanP <dan.pe...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On May 23, 3:31 am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>>>> Wrong. Bigger apertures allow higher resolution. That's why big >>>>> telescopes are better than tiny ones. >>>> Telescopes are focused at infinity so that is a different case. >>> ?!? >>> >>> Why is that different? >> Because their optics are fixed > > Nope. > >> and you want the biggest lens/mirror >> you can get. > > Because bigger means higher resolution. I think it's because telescopes have very large focal lengths so the aperture needed to avoid diffraction becomes very large.
From: Jeff Jones on 23 May 2010 19:53 On Sun, 23 May 2010 16:30:47 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote: >Ray Fischer wrote: >> DanP <dan.petre(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> On 23 May, 18:50, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>>> DanP <dan.pe...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On May 23, 3:31 am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>>>>> Wrong. Bigger apertures allow higher resolution. That's why big >>>>>> telescopes are better than tiny ones. >>>>> Telescopes are focused at infinity so that is a different case. >>>> ?!? >>>> >>>> Why is that different? >>> Because their optics are fixed >> >> Nope. >> >>> and you want the biggest lens/mirror >>> you can get. >> >> Because bigger means higher resolution. > >I think it's because telescopes have very large focal lengths so the >aperture needed to avoid diffraction becomes very large. Just as I thought. You're as brain-dead as DanP. This would explain your macrophotography as well, where you can't even get the whole subject in focus. You might want to schedule a check-up and inquiry about obtaining some anti-psychotic medications. Get the "Manic-DSLR-Justification" variety.
From: Ray Fischer on 23 May 2010 20:37
Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote: >Ray Fischer wrote: >> DanP <dan.petre(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> On 23 May, 18:50, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>>> DanP <dan.pe...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On May 23, 3:31 am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>>>>> Wrong. Bigger apertures allow higher resolution. That's why big >>>>>> telescopes are better than tiny ones. >>>>> Telescopes are focused at infinity so that is a different case. >>>> ?!? >>>> >>>> Why is that different? >>> Because their optics are fixed >> >> Nope. >> >>> and you want the biggest lens/mirror >>> you can get. >> >> Because bigger means higher resolution. > >I think it's because telescopes have very large focal lengths so the >aperture needed to avoid diffraction becomes very large. I think that you're not making sense. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net |