A beginner need not 'understand' f stops. When he, or she, picks up the camera and is told, and sees, that the hole becomes smaller as the number increases, that's enough. You hold a camera, adjust the stops and see the hole become smaller. After that you know, if you have any common sense at all, that less light gets through the smaller hole for a given exposure time. And ... that the smaller the hole the bigger the number. This should take about five minutes. Why debate the logic and the mathematics? Why complain? "Its not intuitive! Its not right. Those f numbers are stupid! Its this! Its that! It should be the other way around! It should be a more logical set of numbers! It should be blah blah!" Don't waste time that would be better spent reading the booklet that came with your camera.
The numbers, as we _all_ know are perfectly logical, but that's beside the point. Its the way things _are_ and they'll stay that way. To learn that f22 is smaller than f2 takes a minute or two. You are told and you see for yourself. If you can't do that then I respectfully suggest that you forget about photography as a hobby. You're not up to it. There are going to be more things to learn and some demanding intellectual choices to make when you start taking pictures. When I first began using a camera, at the age of about nine, I noticed that the diaphragm of my father's Kodak folding camera closed down when the little lever was adjusted from 'cloudy' to 'bright'. I think it was also marked in f stops ( f8, f11, f16?). But I may be confusing two different cameras. What I do remember clearly was asking my dad why the picture was square and not round - because of the little hole. He couldn't tell me. It was some time before I did find out. My Godfather showed me an optical diagram of a camera in an encyclopaedia. Then he used a big magnifying glass and a piece of paper with a hole in it to show me how lenses and cameras worked. Now, as some members often observe, its time for me to duck I suppose. Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 ----- Original Message ----- From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 12:41 AM Subject: Re: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S > F-stops aren't difficult to understand. It's the ratio of the aperture opening to the focal length of the lens. 50mm lens with a 25mm aperture > is f 2.0. It's a mathematical equation, and makes perfect sense as a way to calculate the aperture opening on any given focal length lens. > > If that isn't taught in the very first class of a photography course, something's wrong. > > Even if one doesn't know or isn't taught that, as long as you know that bigger number is smaller opening, and vice-versa, it all makes sense. > Since (it seems to me) exposure and focus are the two most important things that one needs to know about the physical use of a camera, it's > pretty basic, and shouldn't be a big deal. > > The current f-stop designations have been around as long as lenses have been put on boxes to take photographs. No need to change the standards > now, imho. T'would only lead to more confusion, methinks. > > cheers, > frank > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 11/24/2002 4:54:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > And while they're at it, why don't they get rid of those stupid f > > > numbers? Bigger opening, bigger number. Half the size? Half > > > the > > > number! > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Bob > > > > Now this actually makes sense. Be much easier for us camera novices. Hehehe. > > > > Doe aka Marnie (Who is still figuring out that f22 is "stopping down", while f3.5 is "stopping up" -- at least she think's that's right.) :-) > > -- > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert > Oppenheimer > >
