Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/06/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]AAron You are not that slow. There are a hell of a lot of LUGites that still don't get it. Jerry Aaron Sandler wrote: > Hi Austin, > > Ahhhhh, so even a retrofocal WA's "mostly perpendicular" is still not > perpendicular enough out at the edges of a full-frame DSLR. So I suppose > it would vignette less than a non-retrofocal (e.g., rangefinder) WA lens, > but would still have some vignetting. > > Thanks for clarifying. I'm slow, but I get there. > > -Aaron > > At 01:26 PM 6/27/2003, Austin wrote: > >The angle of light at the edges is NOT perpendicular to the film plane, > >which for film, is not an issue...but for a digital sensor, which has the > >sensing element, basically recessed into a square hole...where the sides of > >the hole cut-off the light getting to the sensing element. It's technically > >called "well depth". > > > >This is also one reason why Contax and Canon had to increase the size of > >their lense mounts, and why Nikon does not have a full frame sensor...and > >the new 14M Kodak camera does not perform well at all with wide angle > >lenses. > > -- > 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