Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/7/84; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!jordan
From: jordan@ucbvax.ARPA (Jordan Hayes)
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Re: Re: Camera Vibration
Message-ID: <5820@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 27-Mar-85 11:23:10 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.5820
Posted: Wed Mar 27 11:23:10 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Mar-85 02:16:14 EST
References: <1257@drusd.UUCP> <1539@watcgl.UUCP>
Reply-To: jordan@ucbvax.UUCP (Jordan Hayes)
Distribution: net
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 22

In article <1539@watcgl.UUCP> dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale) writes:

>Often, a f/1.4 lens will produce a poorer image than a f/1.7 or f/2 lens
>when both are used wide open, in direct contradiction to what you are
>trying to tell us.

Yes, but thet same f/1.4 lens will (most likely) outperform the other
two at f/8.

>>There is no difference between telescope and photographic lenses except for the
>>outward appearance.
>
>Not really true.  How close does your telescope focus?  How light is it?
>These are important in photographic lenses.  So is cost.

Also, what happens in the corners ? Every telescope I've ever used with
a camera mount has had terrible response in the corners of the image...

/jordan
-------
ARPA:	jordan@berkeley.ARPA
UUCP:	..!ucbvax!jordan