> > My inquiry is regarding how an image would look from such a > > long neg.? The stated aperture size is f/360. Would the edges > > suffer from extreme distortion? I'm surprised that the coverage > > would even fill that length of 22cm!?
The aperture is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is the ratio width of format to focal length (corner-corner distance to focal length if one wants to be exact). The ratio of that camera is 3.6 which in theory will have a 4.25 stops fall off at the sides with respect to the center, this kind of fall off is horrendous for glass photography, but for pinhole images, in practice, it doesn't look as big as one may think, IMO. As an example, this image http://members.rogers.com/gpenate/greek.jpg is a portion of a larger image made with a camera with ratio 3 width/focal length, that should give a fall off of 3.4 stops at the top and bottom of the image with respect to the center, and if you ask me, it doesn't look that big of a fall off. > > They share no images produced with said camera so I have > > doubts, with my limited understanding of pinhole imagery, to > > how good the detail would be at the extremes? Again, their camera has a 3.6 ratio, my example image has a 3 ratio, that tells me that if the conditions are favorable: clean pinhole, thin material, good lighting of the extremes of the scene, etc., the detail should be acceptable....and if it not, I really like the heavy fall off to the edges effect, too. Having said all that, I wouldn't buy or use a camera from that company, reasons are obvious. Guillermo
