Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Theoretical lens resolution

Subject: Re: [OM] Theoretical lens resolution
From: "John Petrush" <petrush@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 20:59:04 -0700
Well I have read Dr. Atkins' article a few times and must admit to simply
being baffled.  I have several hours of intense searching only to find
"dispersion" purely as a lens property, not at all applicable to film.  The
closest similarity of such a behavior in today's emulsions is "halation".
But these are characteristics with very different origins.  I mistakenly
thought the two were synonyms - wrong!

What I find kinda funny is every source I have uncovered has the same
conclusion - system resolution is best around 3 stops from wide open, just
lots of different reasons why.  Less and the image is not as sharp, more and
the image is not as sharp.  f/8 - or thereabouts - is universally agreed to
be the sweet spot for best resolution.  As for me and my OM - I'll be happy
to know it works, load 'em up with the film du jour, and have a good time
;-)

Since the math of Third-Order Aberrations is more than I care to wrestle
with, I'll point the interested reader to:
http://www.jmlopt.com/third_order.html?L+jml.  The dispersion discussion
begins just after figure 10.

John P
and thanks for the nudge to dig a little deeper into this, Paul.
______________________________________
there is no "never" - just long periods of "not yet".


Paul D. Farrar <farrar@xxxxxxxxxxxx> pointed out:


>At 08:47 PM 9/28/98 -0700, John P wrote:
>>>My reference is an article entitled "Really Right Stuff for Photography
>>>Afield".  I am uncertain of the original author, my copy is froma person
>>>named Dave Swager.  Anyways, following the discussion on lens resolution
in
>>>relation to aperture, the article states:
>
>There are other opinions on that article. For example Bob Atkins, who
>usually knows what he's talking about:
>
>http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/rrs.html
>
>I haven't gone through it in detail, so I don't have an opinion yet.
>I do object to the way the word "dispersion" is used, since that has an
>accepted (and different) meaning in optics and othe wave mechanics.
>
>Paul Farrar




< 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>
  • Re: [OM] Theoretical lens resolution, John Petrush <=
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz