At 05:35 7/20/01, John Robinson wrote:
--- Chris Charlton <c_charlton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> --- Paul Wallich <pw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > At 11:00
> Whoooooshhhh..........
>
> (That was the sound of that flying over my head at
> high speed...)
>
> Chris ;o)
Interesting question Chris, and the advise given is
well grounded in both math and practial use....however
don't let the facts stop YOU from experimenting.
Sometimes quite suprising and pleasent results come
from breaking the rules. I think a T-mount type lens
with a focal length of 35mm would be about right. They
are often available for $5 or so but you would need an
T-OM adapter. On many of these lenses you could gain
access to the diaphram fairly easy. Just buy some thin
shim brass at the hobby shop, cut a circle to fit over
the diaphram, and drill a 3/4mm hole in the center of
the brass disc, reassemble the lens and try it out.
Not quite f64 (about f45) but you should get almost
unlimited depth of field...fun fun. John Robison
I agree with this completely.
The photographer defines the image with a creative vision of what it will
be. No photograph records or represents 100% reality compared to how
humans would perceive what they see with their own eyes at the exact time
and location the photograph was made.
Let nothing I've written be construed as a set of constraining rules to
follow. All we have are the Physics of Light and Optics _theories_ as we
currently understand them (note I didn't call them immutable laws). These
provide predictable and quantifiable cause-and-effect relationships (not
rules).
There is no artistic "right" or "wrong," only vocabulary tools to define
and describe artistic expression for communicating opinion about the
artistic aspect of a photograph. What truly matters is whether or not the
photographer is achieving the envisioned image in the finished
photograph. Only the photographer who made the image can answer
that. This is the reason I cling to the notion a photographer should
understand as much as possible about technical cause-and-effect in
practical application: to support achieving an artistic vision using
predictable and repeatable methods.
Try it and see what happens! I presumed the original question was aimed at
optimizing DOF without any sharpness degradation, but that could be a
dangerous presumption.
-- John
< 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 >
|