On Monday, August 26, 2002 at 23:24, john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote re "Re: [OM] [OD] What are we expecting?" saying:
> On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 17:24:31 -0400, Tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >On Monday, August 26, 2002 at 17:51, john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >The positive group would have to be different for each focal length, unless
> >it were a kind of reverse multiplier (divider?). Would be nice to gain
> >stops instead of lose them! f/.7 anyone?
>
> This is what I thought - a sort of negative teleconverter. Since for
> a conventional teleconverter the virtual (negative) focal length is
> the same regardless of the prime lens in front of it, would the same
> hold true for a positive lens behind the prime?
>
> >Anyway, Olympus seems to be calling it an SLR, implying there is a mirror
> >box.
>
> The E-10 uses a splitter - I'm assuming that takes up less room than a
> swinging mirror?
It uses the minimum.
But the smaller the lens, the smaller the light for viewing.
I think designers would be wise to ditch the reflex in favour of a
small digital screen at least 1024x768 with an eyepiece and digital
zoom in for focus checks. Perhaps it's because of my presbyopia, but I
think looking at a little screen 8" away, like many digital cameras
have, does not lead to thoughtful pix.
tOM
------- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur -----------------
,__@ Tom A. Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115
_-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8
(*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Laws are the spider's webs which,
if anything small falls into them they ensnare it,
but large things break through and escape.
--Solon, statesman (c.638-c558 BCE)
< 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 >
|