[pure-silver] Re: Depth of Field (35mm vs. 4x5 or 8x10)
- From: Jim Brick <jim@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:48:12 -0700
At 04:36 PM 10/29/2004, Gene Johnson wrote:
>1600mm? You sure about that Jim? I was thinking more like 400. He used a
>100mm on his 35mm camera
The 4x5 frame is roughly 16x the 35mm frame. This is all about image
magnification. 16x 100 = 1600.
But I could be wrong and would gladly accept another proof.
Jim
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
