Just having a look over on Flickr as i do and discovered a picture that was taken with an aperture of f0 with a Nikon body.
What lens would have that sort of capability?
f0 must be a mistake - the F Number comes from the size of the hole compared to the focal length - (Its written more correctly as f/n where n is the stop number) So f/2 on a 100mm lens would mean the aperture is 50mm, f/4 would be an aperture of 25mm and so on. F/0 would be a divide by zero error!
I have seen a 50mm f/0.95 lens on a Canon Rangefinder.
And of course the actual hole is not necessarily the actual size indicated by the f stop - its the effective size!
AFAIK The fastest Nikon ever made was the 58mm 1.2 Noctilux. I'm pretty sure I know where one of these is so I'm keeping quiet on how good it is in case he wants to sell it.... :)
According to mir.com there was an extremely rare 1.0 made but even they don't have pictures of it.
Leica made a legendary 1.0 Noctilux but have replaced this with a 0.95. I would guess it costs more than a nice family car.
I don't know how good the Canon version is, or what they cost - I saw it in a camera shop in Rouen - funnily enough we're back there at half term - bet it has gone!
A picture of a similar camera/lens is http://www.flickr.com/photos/geter/4232667093/in/pool-542864@N25 as ever on flickr.
There are also shots taken with the lens - mostly seem to be mounted on Leica's!
Camera: Nikon D90
Exposure: 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture: f/0.0
Focal Length: 0 mm
ISO Speed: 200
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash:
the more info off the picture on Flickr.
the link for the picture is http://www.flickr.com/photos/noelmyoung/4261279313/meta/
I appreciate that the info that is given as part of the exif is not precise as we would read it - none the less - f0.0 is fairly defined.
Yeah, but so is the focal length - 0!
Its clearly just a mistake and the exif has either been partly stripped or editied.
yep - didn't follow though - i was just taken by the f0 or as a f00l :tup:
At a guess I'd say he used an extension tube which would preserve the camera exif and mask the lens exif. I'd also guess he was closer to f45 than f0 ;)
Hadn't considered that. Give his main photographic subject i would think they are almost the starting point!
Quote from: picsfor on January 10, 2010, 01:01:35 PM
Just having a look over on Flickr as i do and discovered a picture that was taken with an aperture of f0 with a Nikon body.
What lens would have that sort of capability?
I've had that with the D3 but the picture is just black. It's caused by a bad contact between lens and camera and a quick twist puts it right. ;D
OK - i now have the official answer.
Apart from me being an idiot - the answer is - a reversing ring was used. :doh:
So i think Jonathan came closest!
Matter closed then! :tup: