Re: Vignetting and Kodak stereo cameras

[P3D Paul Talbot <ptww@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dr. George A. Themelis wrote:

> Paul Tablott gets it all wrong again!

Cute, George.  ;)  I'm really on a roll, aren't I??  ;)

> I checked Charles' Piper
> Technical Page and did not find any reference to the aperture
> being in-between vs. behind the lenses in connection with
> vignetting.

Last night I searched for it in vain as well.  Of course, "The
Technical Page" has such an enormous wealth of terrific information,
it was like searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack.

As I wrote yesterday, I am unsure of which component is involved in
this placement issue.  While I apparently misattributed the source,
the idea is far too technical for *me* to be able to dream up, so
I must have read it somewhere.  I hope someone on the list can tell
where I saw it so I don't spend any more sleepless nights trying to
remember!  ;)

> 3.5 lenses vignette at small apertures, 2.8 lenses
> do not vignette.  I think it is the lens' design that causes that.

That's what I had always thought until I found this interesting
item and chart sometime in the past week.  It stuck in my mind
as the first time I had seen a reference to a design difference,
other than the lenses, between a 2.8 Realist and a 3.5 Realist.
If the source of the info ever turns up, I'll give the author
the credit he is due.  In the meantime, my apologies to Mr. Piper
for misattributing the info to him.  His compilation is still
a terrific resource every stereophotographer should have.

Paul Talbot


------------------------------