Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Education
Diffraction limited pixels... Really?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Horoscope Fish" data-source="post: 363146" data-attributes="member: 13090"><p>First of all, I do think you're chasing the wind because I don't think this calculation would yield much on a practical level. Even if you *were* able to calculate the optimal combination of focal length, aperture, distance to subject and so forth for any particular lens (and this assumes there even IS such a thing) I think the entire formula is for not because of the highly dynamic nature of <em>light itself</em>. Possibly under studio conditions where the amount, angle and temperature of the light used can be controlled... Possibly. But I doubt it. And I doubt the return would be worth the time and trouble invested.</p><p></p><p>Just my two cent's worth, of course, and if you wish to pursue this line of reasoning I wish you nothing but good luck and better shooting!</p><p></p><p><span style="color: #ffffff">....</span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Horoscope Fish, post: 363146, member: 13090"] First of all, I do think you're chasing the wind because I don't think this calculation would yield much on a practical level. Even if you *were* able to calculate the optimal combination of focal length, aperture, distance to subject and so forth for any particular lens (and this assumes there even IS such a thing) I think the entire formula is for not because of the highly dynamic nature of [I]light itself[/I]. Possibly under studio conditions where the amount, angle and temperature of the light used can be controlled... Possibly. But I doubt it. And I doubt the return would be worth the time and trouble invested. Just my two cent's worth, of course, and if you wish to pursue this line of reasoning I wish you nothing but good luck and better shooting! [COLOR=#ffffff]....[/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Education
Diffraction limited pixels... Really?
Top
