P3D Re: Nishika & Nimslo

["Greg Wageman" <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

From: Dr. George A. Themelis <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


>If I were going to test lenses or cameras, I would include infinity
>with small details.  Of course, what you are going to use the camera
>for is a factor too.  We know that Bill likes "people pictures".
>So his choice was good for him.  Possibly not good for a landscape
>photographer.  It might as well be that the pictures that Bill likes
>are the easiest for any camera to take.  And a Nishika might be a
>good as anything else for this type of photography (which is also
>one of my favorite types too).


In the general case of stereo cameras I'd agree with you, George, but
the Nishika and Nimslo are reduced-baseline cameras (around ~56mm max.).
Images including "infinity" are going to be decidedly hypostereo.
Landscape photography is not where these cameras, or most common
lenticular cameras for that matter, shine.  So while such a test might
reveal some degree of softness, it would be mostly irrelevant because
that's not how you'd typically use these cameras.  Comparing their
performance in the 6-to-20 foot range is a useful apples-to-apples
comparison.

I think Bill's "test" goes a long way to show that there isn't anything
glaringly wrong with the Nishika (that isn't also wrong with the
Nimslo).  Many stereocard makers in the circuit Susan belongs to use the
Nimslo and the results are quite good, so please don't read that as
intending a slight of the Nimslo.

     -Greg W. (gjw@xxxxxxxxxx)







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