I'm both glad and sorry to hear that.

It's hard getting good moon pix onto 35mm film. You only get 1mm in on-film moon diameter for every 100mm on focal length. You need a 2000mm lens to fill the frame.

The 10D's 1.6X factor will certainly help here.

Mr. Bill


Tom Pfeiffer wrote:


By my standards then, they were breathtaking. I marveled at the detail in
each crater, the contrasting seas that were essentially lost to the eye at
night, and the crisp edge of the disk. I still have a couple of 5x7's (and
no doubt the negatives someplace).

Looking at those prints now, the Tri-X looks grainy, the images are kinda
fuzzy at best, and even a vivid imagination fails to make them look anything
like what I can get with a 300mm on a 10D, forget the TC.

Tom P.

* **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************

Reply via email to