No, because, as I understand macro terminology, 3:1 would mean the
image on the film is three times as large as the subject.
Walt Wayman
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Peter Dixon <P.Dixon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 09:36:45 +0100
>1:3 , not 3:1 .... ?
>
>This may be the source of confusion
>
>--
>---------------------------------------------------
>Dr. Peter Dixon
>Neurogenetics Unit, Department of Molecular Pathogenesis
>6th Floor, Institute of Neurology
>Queen Square
>London WC1N 3BG
>Tel: 0207 837 3611 xtn 4305
>Fax: 0207 278 5616
>Mobile: 0775 484 1984
>email: P.Dixon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, peterdixon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>---------------------------------------------------
>
>
>< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
>< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
>< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|