Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: Chris L Peterson <clp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 04:46:33 GMT
On 19 Jan 2006 20:25:56 -0800, "nick" <svla@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>It's easy: it is given by the apparent size of image it creates
>observed from
>the least distance of distinct vision vs. apparent size of the object.
>That makes
>it (h/d)/(h/f)=f/d, "h" being the image hight, "f" the objective f.l.
>and "d" the least
>distance of distinct vision. With the latter being conventionaly
>accepted as 250mm,
>magnification given by 2700mm is 2700/250=10.8 for an average observer.
>
>Note that this stands only for relatively distant objects. The general
>apparent
>magnification formula is M=of/(o-f)d, "o" being the object distance.
Precisely what I said earlier: there are definitions of magnification
that can be applied to single lenses that are of some interest to
optical designers, but are otherwise useless. This is exactly that.
Nobody would or could make any use of this "10.8" value for a 2700mm
objective.
The correct answer remains the same for the OP: there is no such thing
as magnification with only an objective. The term is only meaningful in
a practical sense with a telescope.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: atasselli@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: decaf
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: nick
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- References:
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: Brian Tung
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: Chris L Peterson
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: nick
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: Chris L Peterson
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: nick
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: Chris L Peterson
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: nick
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: Chris L Peterson
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: Stephen Paul
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- From: nick
- Re: Stupid question about magnification
- Prev by Date: Re: Stupid question about magnification
- Next by Date: Re: Stupid question about magnification
- Previous by thread: Re: Stupid question about magnification
- Next by thread: Re: Stupid question about magnification
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|