No, I don't think that is correct, Peter.
I think the point is that the plane of view when the lens is shifted is not
at 90deg to the lens axis. So as you shift, the angle of view increases.
And thus if you take two images at full shift each way as you describe, you
will get more than a normal 24mm coverage.
But that is just my impression, open to challenge!
I would offer to test on my 35/2.8 shift, but it's not a Zuiko, so I suppose
that would be off-topic! (and it's not a shift, it's a T&S)
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of petertje@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 04 June 2003 09:25
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Shift Lenses
--snip
The way I understand this comparison of a 35mm shift to a 24mm is the
following: if you shift it all the way up and mark what you see, then shift
it all the way down and mark what you see, then the complete image covered
by those 2 marks will correspond to the image of a 24mm. Is that correct ?
--snip
Peter.
< 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 >
|