I have a Tak FS78 and quite a few accessories for such antics, but you can't use them on the fly. This is a panorama I just finished last week, with the distance varying from 15 to 20 miles.
> http://www.lazygranch.com/images/ttr/june2007/ttr_pano_1.jp2 You will need a jpeg2000 viewer such as irfranview. I didn't bring up the term "reach", so I wanted everyone on the same page. I'd like it to be the case that less is more when it comes to sensors. Arthur Entlich wrote: >Based upon what you are shooting, you don't need "reach" you need a spy >satellite ;-) > >It all comes down to how much you want to pay, how much weight yo want >to lug, and how long the lenses are you wish to carry. Have you >considered a Telescope? > >Art > > >gary wrote: > > > >>I'm a person that needs "reach", if you define reach as getting shots of >>distance objects. Now generally a person who needs reach is using a >>telephoto lens and possibly combined with a teleconverter. Such a setup >>doesn't put out a lot of light, so the bigger pixels are certainly an >>advantage. Also, I've been told that even if noise was not an issue, you >>can't simply keep reducing the pixel pitch due to difficulties in lens >>design. If anything, a 10um pitch would be optimal. >> >>http://www.lazygranch.com/groom_lake_birds.htm >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
