"Heinrich Zinndorf-Linker (zili@home)" wrote in message ...
Am Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:18:31 -0700 schrieb "Jay Windley":

I misunderstood your point. The Hasselblads used a square 70 millimeter
film format. The Biogon lens had a 38 millimeter focal length which, with
that format, produces a diagonal field of view of approximately 70 degrees.
It was that 70mm, not the film format, that I thought you were indicating.
Sorry for the confusion; it was my mistake. I saw the number "70" and
jumped to the wrong conclusion.

Some small corrections about the Apollo Hasselblads:
image format 55*55mm (shot on 70mm film) between 150 and 180 images
per magazine, depending on film type. And now a listing of used
lenses:
focal length (mm) view angle (degrees)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~
Biogon 4.5/38 38 90
Biogon 5.6/60 60 65
Planar 2.8/80 80 52
Planar 3.5/100 100 43
UV-Sonnar 4.3/105 105 41
Sonnar 5.6/250 250 17
Tele-Tessar 8/500 500 8.5



cu, ZiLi aka HKZL (Heinrich Zinndorf-Linker)

Since there's no lunar atmosphere, just a few of those micrometorites
incoming every hour or so (plus loads of inbound dust bunnies at
perhaps 10km/s), thus essentially nothing sufficiently filtering out
the truly horrific UV spectrum. I'm wonderwing which if any UV filters
were applied, and/or included within those lenses (such as the
"UV-Sonnar 4.3/105")?

Of course a red-50 would have been rather terrific for most B&W film,
though an orange-50 + a red-50 should have been required for best
results.


BTW: I've come across a little something about Sirius that's worth
noting:
Check out this page, it's more or less focused upon mortal creationism
than not, but I do believe directly related to planets such as Mars,
Earth and Venus;
(latest entry) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm