[Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question

[jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols)]

Your analogies brought back thoughts of a rig that I made when I was young 
and had little money to spare.  After reading about the Leica focaslide, I 
carved the necessary parts from wood (leftovers from the wooden packing 
crates in which the USAF shipped our meager household belongings when I came 
off active duty), and fitted them to the back of a 5x7 folding view camera 
that I had acquired.  With my IIIa installed, I set out to photograph an 
eclipse.  The rig worked, but the photos were never spectacular.  The parts 
remain in a closet, 57 years later.

Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George Lottermoser" <imagist3 at mac.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question


> Thanks Jim.
> And I don't think the smaller format sensors
> defy these basic laws of physics, optics, and geometry.
> Movement of camera, subject, or both,
> across that rectangle will be recorded.
>
> The distance of that movement,
> within a given slice of time,
> in proportion to the overall frame size,
> will determine how that movement appears
> in the still photograph.
>
> Developing a good feel
> for how these laws work within the craft of photography
> allows us to control them as variables:
> <http://www.imagist.com/blog/?p=2137>
>
> 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 11:54 AM, Jim Nichols wrote:
>
>> Very good analysis, George!
>>
>> Jim Nichols
>> Tullahoma, TN USA
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Lottermoser" 
>> <imagist3 at mac.com>
>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 9:36 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] OT: Another maybe not so stupid GH1 question
>>
>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>