Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/02

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

Subject: [Leica] PIXEL PITCH SIZE
From: jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols)
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 11:58:32 -0600
References: <C7B2B9C2.5E8DC%mark@rabinergroup.com> <B4555A5D-DE6A-45E5-9BDE-4421C1F76CB8@mac.com>

I looked at two sources.  Both said 5.49, for what that is worth.

Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George Lottermoser" <imagist3 at mac.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] PIXEL PITCH SIZE


> the two numbers came from two different sources.
> I'm not sure which one is correct?
> Just wasn't interested enough to track it down.
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
> On Mar 2, 2010, at 11:49 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>
>> It cold be when they use two numbers like that
>>  5.49 - 5.54 size pixel
>> There is something else going on. Maybe you're supposed to multiply
>> them?!?!?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> 




Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] PIXEL PITCH SIZE)
In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] PIXEL PITCH SIZE)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] PIXEL PITCH SIZE)