Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] pinholes
From: "Tom Schofield" <tdschofield@email.msn.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 15:41:09 -0400
References: <B54ED0E8.E41E%deadman@jukebox.demon.co.uk> <v04011716b54f41d513cd@[209.53.32.31]>

Agreed, but if you are doing it  yourself with aluminum foil and a pin,
without a machine cutting a precision pinhole, then "as small as you can
make it," is probably the best approximation of optimum size, isn't it?

Tom

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Henning J. Wulff" <henningw@archiphoto.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] pinholes


> At 11:48 AM -0400 5/22/00, Tom Schofield wrote:
> >1)  As small as you can make it.
>
> No, no, no! The right size hole is one where the benefits of making it
> smaller, so that less spreading of the image occurs, is just balanced by
> the benefits of making it larger to reduce diffraction effects. This
> balance is extremely important. As diffraction effects are a function of
> the perimeter length and the area of the opening, it is also very
important
> to have a clean, circular opening through as thin a material as possible.
> Gold is best, as it can be made very thin while still opaque, but brass is
> very good and is the usual choice.
>
>    *            Henning J. Wulff
>   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
>  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
>  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
>

In reply to: Message from Johnny Deadman <deadman@jukebox.demon.co.uk> ([Leica] pinholes)
Message from "Henning J. Wulff" <henningw@archiphoto.com> (Re: [Leica] pinholes)