Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/07/31

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Compendium Review
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:42:01 -0700
References: <3DAE15C6DFDAD211ABA80008C7EABAB30247962B@uleis01nok>

Ext-Peter.Sikking@nokia.com wrote:
> 
> --> This book is my first introduction to lens
> --> aberrations, and because of the shaky physics
> --> I do not have the feeling I can trust him on
> --> this subject.
> 
> --What specific errors in physics did you encounter in the book?
> 
> I said shaky (as in out of his depth), not wrong.
> 
> One example that really sticks in my mind is where he introduces
> a definition of a flux (= net flow of something through a _surface_)
> to jump to this apparent law that for a given focal length, the
> _volume_ of the tube devided by the square of the max aperiture is
> constant. That law may be true, but I am not convinced, yet.
> 
>         --ps/032

Done much study of optics and lens design?



Mark Rabiner

Portland, Oregon
USA

http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/

In reply to: Message from Ext-Peter.Sikking@nokia.com (RE: [Leica] Compendium Review)