Subject: | RE: [OM] Long Focus vs. Mirror Lens |
---|---|
From: | "Timpe, Jim" <Jim.Timpe@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:49:11 -0800 |
This is the case because these mirror lenses are solid catadioptric designs, and there's no place 'inside' to put a regular diaphragm. Most have rear accessory threads for ND filters. -----Original Message----- From: Daniel J. Mitchell > Cons are that it almost always has a fixed apeture > (usually at f8 or so). Why is this the case? I've only ever seen mirror lenses at f8, but what is it about the design that stops them putting aperture blades in there? < 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 > |
Previous by Date: | RE: [OM] Long Focus vs. Mirror Lens, M. Lloyd |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] Cleaning oily films off of glass, msparks@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
Previous by Thread: | RE: [OM] Long Focus vs. Mirror Lens, Daniel J. Mitchell |
Next by Thread: | RE: [OM] Long Focus vs. Mirror Lens, Winsor Crosby |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |