Julian Loke schrieb:
>
> Hello,
>
> The recent discussion on the EOS mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] about f stop
> increments reminded me of an article in Toomas Tamm's photo website.
> He wrote that EOS exposure is not stepless, but in fact uses 8 steps
> per stop. See:
>
> http://www.chem.helsinki.fi/~toomas/photo/experiment-1.html
>
> http://www.chem.helsinki.fi/~toomas/photo/experiment-2.html
>
> If this is the case, EOS "one-third steps" would probably round to
> 0 3/8 5/8 8/8
> while "one-half steps" would not be rounded:
> 0 4/8 8/8
>
> Do you think this is true?
I'm pretty sure it is true that the exposure, at least the aperture,
is not really stepless. That would mean to use an analog signal in
the camera/lens interface in order to get it stepless. I'm not so sure
about the rounding, because I don't see a technical reason why these steps
would have to be equidistant. But it may as well be the case of course.
Actually, I would think 6 (or 12) steps for a full stop would make more
sense. That would allow for 1/2 and 1/3 stops and (in case of 12)
intermediate values.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter for practical purposes. 1/8 stop is
plenty enough precision. I think on the same site (or was it somewhere
else ;-)) I once read, that the shutter speeds aren't equal to the marked
values as well. The 30 seconds would e.g. be 32 seconds in reality (just
like it should really be as a shutter speed 5 stops slower than 1 second).
Again, the difference is too small to really matter for practical purposes.
Thomas Bantel
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
