Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/02/14

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF Back focus one more time
From: Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@pacbell.net>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 17:44:33 -0800
References: <200302131714.JAA11678@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> <a05111700ba71d2acb52f@[218.102.82.212]> <00fb01c2d3d8$e7153a80$6f01a8c0@jsbigrig> <008401c2d44e$ce94efc0$2dd871d8@jbilinsk> <p05100306ba73025aec3b@[209.53.33.241]> <003e01c2d47d$a42cdfc0$3dd871d8@jbilinsk> <p05100300ba7333985287@[209.53.33.241]>

Henning

What do you mean by "wider focal lengths"?  Why don't you say what
you mean?  Do you mean wider angle lenses?  Or shorter focal lengths,
which for Leicas is the same.

Please understand that a focal length is measured in millimeters, but
an angle is measured in degrees.  You are mixing adjectives.

Small English lesson from someone whose first language was not
English either.  :-)

Henning Wulff wrote:

> At 3:05 PM -0800 2/14/03, Jacques Bilinski & Barbara Bradbury wrote:
> >  > infinity. A Summilux wide open would show this discrepancy easily. A
> >>  Noctilux would focus at about 12m with the same film - flange
> >>  discrepancy; that is why it is easier to see with a wideangle lens.
> >>
> >I understand that with a wideangle a discrepancy would cause the lens to be
> >focused at a closer distance than with a longer focal length. My point is
> >that at the same f stop both images of an object at infinity would be
> >equally fuzzy.  Do you agree? I guess that when you are doing these tests
> >you are determining the distance of optimal sharpness. Then I can understand
> >that if the distance is closer with a WA it is easier to identify.
>
> Yes, a point at infinity is just as fuzzy with either lens. However,
> with a longer lens more is fuzzy in any case, so the fuzziness at
> infinity does not stand out as much, and if an object that is quite
> close is sharp instead of infinity, that is more noticeable than if
> an object in the middle distance is sharp instead of infinity. If the
> latter, you might assume that you focused incorrectly.
>
> If you are actually testing for this, you're right, the focal length
> does not matter. If you are just shooting, the discrepancy will
> become obvious more readily with the wider focal lengths.
>
> --
>     *            Henning J. Wulff
>    /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
>   /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
>   |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF Back focus one more time)
In reply to: Message from Cummer <cummer@netvigator.com> ([Leica] Re: Hexar RF Back focus one more time)
Message from "John Straus" <Mail@SlideOne.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF Back focus one more time)
Message from "Jacques Bilinski & Barbara Bradbury" <jbilin@axionet.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF Back focus one more time)
Message from Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF Back focus one more time)
Message from "Jacques Bilinski & Barbara Bradbury" <jbilin@axionet.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF Back focus one more time)
Message from Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Hexar RF Back focus one more time)