Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks Mark for posting a telling example (nice textures and tones BTW) My question was semi-innocent but also very earnest in disguise as the Panas you don't like so much, offer a choice of format (look at GH1 sensor specs) which questions two basic assumptions in traditional photography: a) the image circle - its size and more importantly shape or, how to prevent useless light from bouncing on the sensor box walls for instance while retaining quality across the frame when that frame can have different specs while using the same lenses. b) the larger the sensitive area (film or sensor) the more light you need (cf thread on S2), which would mean that with a 4/3 you would not need as fast lenses to achieve the same results as on a 24x36. Which we assume to be false. I don't know if my questionning is clear here. Maybe it doesn't matter at all, and certainly only the final result counts, in the eyes of the viewer... Thanks again for your consideration. Bien cordialement de Metz Philippe NO ARCHIVE Le 21 mars 10 ? 07:57, Mark Rabiner a ?crit : > >> a circle is a circle , how comes it has to be corrected? >> >> ph >> >> > Your probably kidding but maybe your not. > The image circle is not critical. > some image circles are not all that round. > It doesn't make any difference. You never see it. > Optical designers are more concerned with what you can see. > > Here's my only shot with some image circle included. (at the very top) > http://rabinergroup.com/ImagePages/LewisandClarkpuddlepage.html > > > > [Rabs] > Mark William Rabiner > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >