Enough to support 11mm of shift on a 35mm frame. There's a couple 35mm
mount tilt/shift adapters available that use P645 lenses, usually the
FA35.
-Adam
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Nick Wright nickwright1...@gmail.com wrote:
Sure, do we know how large the image circle of a typical FA645
Shift with the sensor is possible if I understood things correctly.
However, ther's not a lot of space for the sensor to move, e few
millimiteres at best.
It may help, it is nice to be able to, but it won't replace a true shift lens.
--
Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 7:08 PM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, lets presume that it's a perfect world snip
The optimist says this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears he is right. -- J. Robert Oppenheimer
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept.
11mm of movement may not very much, except when you're talking about it
in terms of moving the APS-C sized sensor, within the camera body. Then
you're looking at a movement that's 45% of the sensor's long axis and
69% of it's short axis, with a commensurate increase in the size of the
mirror
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 05:08:52PM -0600, William Robb scripsit:
- Original Message -
From: Graydon
Or maybe I'm just confused, and I'm not sure I can manage ASCII art
diagrams for the first couple floors being right here, nicely parallel
to the sensor, and the top two floors,
I know it wouldn't be very feasible in an APS sized camera. That's why
I specifically mentioned that perhaps we might see such a feature in
the reportedly upcoming 645D.
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 9:37 AM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote:
11mm of movement may not very much, except when
I should have read the post I was responding to better please ignore.
P. J. Alling wrote:
11mm of movement may not very much, except when you're talking about
it in terms of moving the APS-C sized sensor, within the camera body.
Then you're looking at a movement that's 45% of the sensor's
- Original Message -
From: Graydon
Subject: Re: K-7 composition shift question
Appreciate the explanation.
I think I owed you one.
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please
On May 21, 2009, at 02:08 , Thibouille wrote:
Shift with the sensor is possible if I understood things correctly.
However, ther's not a lot of space for the sensor to move, e few
millimiteres at best.
It may help, it is nice to be able to, but it won't replace a true
shift lens.
I agree.
So this new feature that allows you to shift the sensor for composition.
Would that allow you to use the sensor in a similar (though very
limited) way as a shift lens? Could you use that function to correct a
slight amount of keystoning in architecture for example?
--
~Nick David Wright
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 05:18:02PM -0500, Nick Wright scripsit:
So this new feature that allows you to shift the sensor for composition.
Would that allow you to use the sensor in a similar (though very
limited) way as a shift lens? Could you use that function to correct a
slight amount of
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 05:18:02PM -0500, Nick Wright scripsit:
So this new feature that allows you to shift the sensor for composition.
Would that allow you to use the sensor in a similar (though very
limited) way as a shift
- Original Message -
From: Graydon
Subject: Re: K-7 composition shift question
To correct keystone effects, you'd have to be able to tilt the sensor
relative to the focal plane, which I don't think you can do.
This isn't correct.
To correct keystoning, the sensor has
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 04:35:11PM -0600, William Robb scripsit:
- Original Message -
From: Graydon
Subject: Re: K-7 composition shift question
To correct keystone effects, you'd have to be able to tilt the sensor
relative to the focal plane, which I don't think you can do
- Original Message -
From: Graydon
Subject: Re: K-7 composition shift question
This isn't correct.
To correct keystoning, the sensor has to be parallel to the object being
photographed.
Parallel, parallel, or perspective parallel?
I think you are stuttering.
William Robb
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 04:45:58PM -0600, William Robb scripsit:
- Original Message -
Subject: Re: K-7 composition shift question
This isn't correct.
To correct keystoning, the sensor has to be parallel to the object being
photographed.
Parallel, parallel, or perspective
- Original Message -
From: Graydon
Subject: Re: K-7 composition shift question
Or maybe I'm just confused, and I'm not sure I can manage ASCII art
diagrams for the first couple floors being right here, nicely parallel
to the sensor, and the top two floors, fifteen floors above
I doubt that there's enough shift involved to do that.
Nick Wright wrote:
So this new feature that allows you to shift the sensor for composition.
Would that allow you to use the sensor in a similar (though very
limited) way as a shift lens? Could you use that function to correct a
slight
After I posted the question I saw the imaging resources page which
says I believe that the sensor can be shifted 2mm up or down.
On a shift lens what kind of travel is there?
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 6:49 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote:
I doubt that there's enough shift involved to
8-11m on most 35mm or MF format SLR lenses, several cm to several
inches on a large format camera.
-Adam
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Nick Wright nickwright1...@gmail.com wrote:
After I posted the question I saw the imaging resources page which
says I believe that the sensor can be shifted
Impressive - that would put it in the next room. :-)
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 08:59:02PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
8-11m on most 35mm or MF format SLR lenses, several cm to several
inches on a large format camera.
-Adam
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Nick Wright nickwright1...@gmail.com
mm of course, my bad;-)
-Adam
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 9:02 PM, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote:
Impressive - that would put it in the next room. :-)
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 08:59:02PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
8-11m on most 35mm or MF format SLR lenses, several cm to several
inches on a
8-11m 8 meters is a lot of shift! (I think you meant /mm/ )
Adam Maas wrote:
8-11m on most 35mm or MF format SLR lenses, several cm to several
inches on a large format camera.
-Adam
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Nick Wright nickwright1...@gmail.com wrote:
After I posted the question
8-11mm isn't a terrible lot of movement.
I wonder how difficult it would be to implement a sensor shift of that
magnitude in say a medium format digital body?
Can you imagine that? It wouldn't give you tilt control (but perhaps
that wouldn't be that hard to put in either?) but just think being
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 08:49:54PM -0500, Nick Wright wrote:
8-11mm isn't a terrible lot of movement.
I wonder how difficult it would be to implement a sensor shift of that
magnitude in say a medium format digital body?
Can you imagine that? It wouldn't give you tilt control (but perhaps
Sure, do we know how large the image circle of a typical FA645 lens is?
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 8:56 PM, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 08:49:54PM -0500, Nick Wright wrote:
8-11mm isn't a terrible lot of movement.
I wonder how difficult it would be to implement a
Well, I'm pretty sure it's at least 75mm in diameter :-)
Seriously, though, it depends very much on the lens. And
even then it's not necessarily a hard-and-fast boundary;
image quality generally tails off as you get to the edges.
Unfortunately it's usually the shorter focal lengths that
are
27 matches
Mail list logo
