Yes, I know. So if it is that important, why aren't 24x36 lenses designed to
cover a much larger area than the film frame? That would ensure that the entire
frame falls in the central portion of the lens field.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mikael Risedal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 19:10
Subject: Re: filmscanners: NIKON LS 4000 AND D1X
> A lens are sharper in the middle, I suggest that you go to http://www
> Photodo.com
> MTF tests of lenses by Lars Kjellberg or read Norman Koren page
> http://www.normankoren.com/
> Mikael Risedal
>
> >From: "Anthony Atkielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Re: filmscanners: NIKON LS 4000 AND D1X
> >Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 20:30:30 +0200
> >
> >Steve writes:
> >
> > > But you do have the advantage that the centre is
> > > invariably sharper, often much sharper, than the edge.
> >
> >If that is such an advantage, why hasn't anyone designed lenses for 24x36
> >that
> >cover a much larger area than the film frame? The same logic would apply.
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
