Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/26

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

Subject: [Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question
From: passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro)
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:37:23 -0400
References: <daaeb97e1003251901x39685bb5w60bb366bf9ca4089@mail.gmail.com> <a3f189161003252005y54471dadm7a899184f4656a8@mail.gmail.com> <daaeb97e1003252014q462910c5yefac14166cf0ae48@mail.gmail.com> <a3f189161003252054y79906939o1a220e432c04a26c@mail.gmail.com> <19b6d42d1003252129t4f187030h3c55760ac01e99b@mail.gmail.com> <eb6799211003252204n6fb843fblb96565e0931ad77a@mail.gmail.com> <19b6d42d1003260030r45049a51rd16732edcf098182@mail.gmail.com> <eb6799211003260055o19325a60jb7267d251309394b@mail.gmail.com> <19b6d42d1003260113g15b3a95bx4e1cf0a2b4cac69e@mail.gmail.com> <3BD380D7-95D9-44B5-A8CD-AF88C74E3A0B@mac.com>

What you describe George is a difference of a tiny movement played out
hundreds and hundreds of yards away so that the tremor in the 35mm will
entirely change its field of view (perhaps by 25 yards) while in the 8X10 it
might show as a small blur or be hardly noticeable or whatever.

But the idea on a GF1 2X crop v. a Nikon 1.5 v. an M9 full frame, that a
45mm lens needs to be adjusted to that degree or any appreciable degree (so
that for instance the 20mm pancake can be handily shot at 1/20 but switch to
the 45 and you have to be at 1/90) makes no sense to me. I understand the
geometric principles at work just not at that scale. (Atomic nuclei have a
gravitational force but the electrons don't notice it apparently.) Same
here. It's on a practical level that I don't see it.  I think with that
camera at its weight and those lenses you could easily shoot both at 1/15th
if you had to and succeed (depending on your tremulousness) anywhere from 5
to 8 times out of ten in not showing camera shake. Which is why I shoot in
multiple mode always and eliminate the copies I don't want.

We can drop this now because to the degree I'm going to get it I got it
 V

On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:36 AM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at 
mac.com>wrote:

> It really is not that complex Vince.
> Imagine an 8x10 view camera with a "normal" 300mm lens.
> It sits on a hill top overlooking a valley.
> You'll see a relatively "normal" view on the ground glass.
> Replace the 8x10 back with a 5x7 back.
> You'll see a significantly narrower field of view
> Replace the 5x7 back with a 4x5 back;
> even narrower.
> Replace the 4x5 back with a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 back.
> and you're reaching into a very narrow field of view.
> Hang a 35 mm camera on the back
> and you're focusing on a bird that you didn't even notice
> when using the 8x10 back.
>
> With each of those changes in format,
> using the same lens and distance from subject,
> camera movement will have an ever increasing effect
> because the movement will show as a greater proportion of the format.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
> On Mar 26, 2010, at 3:13 AM, Vince Passaro wrote:
>
>  nobody really understands this crop
>> factor thing in a rational way:
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
In reply to: Message from digiratidoc at gmail.com (James Laird) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from digiratidoc at gmail.com (James Laird) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question)