Minox/Miniature
3,041 topics in this forum
-
- 0 replies
- 7 views
-
- 0 replies
- 5 views
-
- 0 replies
- 24 views
-
- 1 reply
- 52 views
-
- 0 replies
- 47 views
-
- 1 reply
- 60 views
-
- 0 replies
- 49 views
-
- 1 reply
- 58 views
-
- 1 reply
- 46 views
-
- 0 replies
- 41 views
-
- 0 replies
- 45 views
-
- 3 replies
- 80 views
-
- 0 replies
- 60 views
-
- 1 reply
- 49 views
-
- 3 replies
- 216 views
-
- 0 replies
- 57 views
-
- 1 reply
- 94 views
-
- 2 replies
- 69 views
-
- 3 replies
- 74 views
-
- 0 replies
- 61 views
-
- 0 replies
- 52 views
-
- 1 reply
- 65 views
-
- 0 replies
- 86 views
-
- 0 replies
- 84 views
-
- 0 replies
- 71 views
(800x800).thumb.jpg.c94833d6ea93605f47351873a94fc0cc.jpg)
-
Who's Online 14 Members, 0 Anonymous, 609 Guests (See full list)
-
Recent Gallery Images
-
Recent Forum Wide Posts
-
-
-
-
By winfried_buechsenschuetz1 · Posted
Yes, the diaphragm diameter cannot be measured directly, you always have to take into accout the magnifying factor of the lens. The thing about the f/2 and f/2.8 of the Retina is no myth. I think Rick Oleson described the method of removing the stop on one of his fabolous camera repair pages - if they still exist, must be a decade or so since I last visited them. -
-
.jpg.8efa2df4163047894c2f017eb923665d.jpg)
.png.55e7431936a9b6836eabd596c202107f.png)
(7Plates).png.07ccff5ed1c0d39f9a054adc9f190278.png)
(7Plates).png.3732abfce1182c743f4600deab47c145.png)
