<<If I were looking for an ideal copy of a Blogogon 8/1.0, all it takes is a
couple of minutes and a few shots, to document each one, as I rent or buy and
return. No adjustment/accommodation <<for different foliage, light, etc. as
with this outside technique.
The Blogogon gets nice reviews. Filed curvature can vary with focusing
distance. Not sure how far away the test targets must be for an ultrawide and
is that practical? Otherwise I would agree I like your methodology and it has
advantages. I had had to quickly determine centering issues so proceeded
accordingly.
<<Is this from Roger? I'm wondering how someone outside of Oly production
<<engineers can know this, especially statistics.
That data was from an Oly engineer during one of those long boring interviews.
I slogged through the whole thing.
<<<<Roger has also stated MFT lenses have more sample variability than others.
<<Might this be related to scale? Missing spec by 0.01 mm makes a larger
<<difference for 4/3 than FF?
Good question. Your speculation seems reasonable to me.
<<<OK, this raises a question. Why does linear distortion matter - for this
specific purpose? If the stars are nice pinpoints, does it matter if their
locations differ a bit from a true star map?
Agreed, but any tutorial I have read said to not correct distortion. Also
might screw up the stacking with dark frames. Do you think the stars would not
be affected? You know more about how the various correction algorithms work
than almost anyone.
Unstandardized, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|