|
|
Posted by mv on 09/07/06 11:24
In message <5jmvf2p15cn3b699lpjgvobvps72adlfv8@4ax.com>, Martin Heffels
<feipbjszfo@oxeszdjnlp.xercdpvueppjtmougcqvtz.net> writes
>On 7 Sep 2006 00:37:29 -0700, Acurajustin1978@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>Why such a strange notation? Why not just use mm?
>
>I will resist, because I will get confused then ;-)
>Inches forever!
>
>-m-
Indeed, inches for ever, and pints and ounces and miles. Bloody Napoleon
started all this metric business as a means of merely expedient control
of the purely materialistic and shallow minded, what used to be called
peasants. Hard to spot the peasants today since they now wear Armani,
drive fast cars and even have degrees. But as the old saying goes; "The
thing about class is that you can't buy it and it doesn't rub off".
Emperial measure has its provenance back to the sacred canon of numbers,
the true measure of the microcosm and the macrocosm. How many degrees in
sphere, or moons in year.
With regard to CCD sizes though. As a rule of thumb bigger is better,
however developmental generation counts too. For example the 1/3" Super
HAD 16x9 CCD's on a Z1 are as good or better in most respects to the
2/3rd inch CCD's on BVW 300 and maybe even a 400. The single CMOS device
fitted into the A1 indicates a whole new way of thinking too.
--
John Lubran
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|