Subject: Sputnik f:32 Modification
Date: 2017-12-14 10:46:31
From: borisstarosta

Here's my post with pictures:

I bet you can take this even further, like to f:64, if you wanted to join that club! (Does it still have members?)

Maybe I'll try it just for fun. Or maybe the irises are liable to get stuck at f:64... that would be bad!

cheers,

Boris

Subject: Re: Sputnik f:32 Modification
Date: 2017-12-14 11:53:02
From: JR

The f/64 Club was back in the days of really big film: LF (large format) 8 x 10 sheet film and glass plate cameras. With those, the "normal" focal lengths were so long that the physical size of apertures were much larger for such a small stop. I used to use a process camera that took 11 x 14 film, and some of the lenses did indeed stop down to f/64.

With MF, such a small aperture would result in a visible softening of the image, due to diffraction. I would not recommend apertures smaller than f/32 (or even f/22) with MF. I think that you would be amazed at the depth of field possible at f/22. Diffraction limiting is the key.

John A. Rupkalvis

stereoscope3d@gmail.com

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 8:46 AM, boris@starosta.com [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Here's my post with pictures:

https://www.patreon.com/posts/ 15882525

I bet you can take this even further, like to f:64, if you wanted to join that club! (Does it still have members?)

Maybe I'll try it just for fun. Or maybe the irises are liable to get stuck at f:64... that would be bad!

cheers,

Boris