I dunno about that. I always thought that a flat field of focus was what I needed to do copy work of flat pictures and documents. I really thought that flat field of focus was not necessarily an advantage when doing macros of 3-D objects.
I would advise shooting at smaller apertures to attain greater DOF. To do that, you may need to use faster film, or get a ringlight to get more light to allow using smaller apertures. Len --- -----Original Message----- From: Timothy Sherburne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:14 PM To: Pentax Discussion List Subject: Re: Macro question... Hello again! Thanks to Peter, Ayash, Kevin and Fred for their responses, which all came to basically the same conclusion: the A50/1.4 simply does not have a flat enough field of focus to work well for macro photography; the curvature of the lens elements are becoming more apparent as the depth of field decreases. Okay, with that said, I believe the solution was to use a slower lens or stop down. Is it accurate to conclude that the slower the lens, the flatter focusing field? The 50/4 is flatter than the 50/2 is flatter than the 50/1.7, et cetera? t - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
