Re: F number
From: Len Philpot (len_at_philpot.org)
Date: 11/20/04
- Next message: Len Philpot: "Re: Letterman Gets Sirius"
- Previous message: HAVRILIAK: "Re: F number"
- In reply to: Alan French: "Re: F number"
- Next in thread: Mark Smith: "Re: F number"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 08:08:53 -0600
In article <%AHnd.4961$1u.525@twister.nyroc.rr.com>,
adfrenchremoveallthis@nycap.rr.com says...
> "eric" <eric.archambeault@videotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:G4znd.54475$Uy.1273097@weber.videotron.net...
> > Hi Eric,
> >
> > Low F is more bright, and Hi F give more contrast. [SNIP]
>
> The image brightness depends on aperture, not f/ratio. F/ratio has no
> relation to contrast, although an obstructed instrument of high or "slow:
> f/ratio is likely to have a smaller obstruction, resulting in a slight
> increase in contrast.
Absolutely. It's all too easy to look at the focal ratio and forget
that it's just that - A /ratio/. For someone new to telescopes (and
particularly familiar with camera lenses), it's easy to get things
backward. A camera lens set at different f stops is varying aperture
with a constant aperture, while comparing two, e.g. 6" telescopes of
different f ratios is a difference of focal length, not aperture.
Varying either against the other is what changes the f ratio.
I suspect some people might try an 8" f8 scope with eyepiece X, then
an 8" f4, also with eyepiece X and come to the conclusing that the f4
is instrinsically brighter. However, it's actually just operating at
half the manification and therefore four times the brightness. Take
an eyepiece of X/4 and try it in the f8 and it will be just a bright.
-- -- Len Philpot -> len@philpot.org <-- ------ ><> -----> http://philpot.org/ <--
- Next message: Len Philpot: "Re: Letterman Gets Sirius"
- Previous message: HAVRILIAK: "Re: F number"
- In reply to: Alan French: "Re: F number"
- Next in thread: Mark Smith: "Re: F number"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|