your last photo, the one thats more important, is very unfocused. can u take a better picture please?
mwahahaha i love the lego stand for the lens
well with flash, the photo is focused, but you can't see a thing in the lens because of the reflection, and without flash i can't hold my hand still enough... I'll try, but no promises...
hehe, built in 5 mins and does its job
at first I thought of a better stand, but now I think I don't need it Bummer, the last pic, the one I really want to see, I can't load for some reason. Probably my crappy dialup, I'll try it later.
ok, I shot about 10 more pics and this one is the sharpest...
Lol are those legos hold it up?!
Looking good, must say
Looking good, must say
I'm also interested in this and I think such a setup
http://forum.rscnet.org/showth ... 229&highlight=fresnel
would be something I would like to have. But what about the distance of the viewer to the lens, how much does it influence the distortion, magnification, etc. of the percieved image? Would a setup like the above be useable to watch a movie on the couch placed several meters away? I can't really imagine how this would affect the image.
http://forum.rscnet.org/showth ... 229&highlight=fresnel
would be something I would like to have. But what about the distance of the viewer to the lens, how much does it influence the distortion, magnification, etc. of the percieved image? Would a setup like the above be useable to watch a movie on the couch placed several meters away? I can't really imagine how this would affect the image.
Finally, I've got my package: F330, 2 200x160mm lens (don't know where to use thoug ), and 10 visit-card lenses as a presents for friends. In 2005-2006 I had a different debit card, which was not accepted by some payment systems. Now the new one worked well, and I've bough some lenses.
First, I took my own lens depth calculator and reconsidered carefully the focal length and dimensions. Conclusions:
1. The main thing in the lens is large real FOV to involve peripherial vision, and monitor width improves your results a lot. 19" makes real FOV significantly more than 17", 20" is even more advantageous, and so on. Though, according to my tests, even 17" monitor works good.
2. 330 mm is the best length for gaming. 3dlens.com wrote "for gaming" in the description of F330, but not in F280's, and they're absolutely right. F280 is a bit short and makes not enough visible depth.
3. Significantly longer or shorter focal length makes lens very hard to use. Longer = less visible FOV; shorter = less depth, hence tires your eyes.
I'll make a box to attach the lens to the monitor and will post the pictures tonight.
), and 10 visit-card lenses as a presents for friends. In 2005-2006 I had a different debit card, which was not accepted by some payment systems. Now the new one worked well, and I've bough some lenses.First, I took my own lens depth calculator and reconsidered carefully the focal length and dimensions. Conclusions:
1. The main thing in the lens is large real FOV to involve peripherial vision, and monitor width improves your results a lot. 19" makes real FOV significantly more than 17", 20" is even more advantageous, and so on. Though, according to my tests, even 17" monitor works good.
2. 330 mm is the best length for gaming. 3dlens.com wrote "for gaming" in the description of F330, but not in F280's, and they're absolutely right. F280 is a bit short and makes not enough visible depth.
3. Significantly longer or shorter focal length makes lens very hard to use. Longer = less visible FOV; shorter = less depth, hence tires your eyes.
I'll make a box to attach the lens to the monitor and will post the pictures tonight.
I've always wanted to buy a fresnel lens, but always doubted between a 550 or a 330. I think I'll just get the 330 trusting the homework you've done regarding fresnel lenses 
Not that soon as I thought. We had issues with Oracle BPM system in the office, had to have all hands to the pump. 
Came home at 23:00.
So, here is my temporary fast solution. Look, this is why one should read a lot.
I usually sit close to the table, with hands on kbd under the desk, and the monitor stands at the other side, in 1 m from the eyes. In this case I had to move it close to me. Driving with mouse won't lead you to many wins, but in this case it is convenient.
In the second picture, this is a medium-size lens, 260*180mm. In the third, a visit-card lens. Makes crooked picture on high magnifying rate (as in the photo), but still does magnify, and can be a nice souvenir, if you can't find this in a store in your area.
Discovery #1: look through the center of the lens.
I supposed something of this kind, but couldn't imagine it would be such a problem. So, I had to rise the center of the lens (and monitor as well) up to the level of eyes. Still, these books in the picture were not enough. I didn't want to risk to raise things higher, and instead took an old small stool.
Not a discovery #2: you can look into the lens as close as you want, if there is enough magnifying and depth.
Discovery #3: the monitor looks very different. Things look like real-life-size! And the screen covers large FOV, which changes perception a lot! You can percept your car shaking with a different sense: if you roll over, it "feels" like you are rolling and hitting the ground. (You need "1g head move" parameters to be >0, about 0.03 m)
Discovery #4, not good: the picture is a bit blurry. Colours "leak" a bit, and the picture is not as shar as without the lens. Reduce the distance between the lens and monitor to reduce magnifying factor and also draw back from the lens, to reduce the angles of refraction. So, again a trade-off: FOV vs sharpness.
Discovery #5: it is better to use the lens in a dark room. I'll make a box, black lustreless inside, but still the light in the room will make glares.
Came home at 23:00.So, here is my temporary fast solution. Look, this is why one should read a lot.
I usually sit close to the table, with hands on kbd under the desk, and the monitor stands at the other side, in 1 m from the eyes. In this case I had to move it close to me. Driving with mouse won't lead you to many wins, but in this case it is convenient.In the second picture, this is a medium-size lens, 260*180mm. In the third, a visit-card lens. Makes crooked picture on high magnifying rate (as in the photo), but still does magnify, and can be a nice souvenir, if you can't find this in a store in your area.
Discovery #1: look through the center of the lens.
I supposed something of this kind, but couldn't imagine it would be such a problem. So, I had to rise the center of the lens (and monitor as well) up to the level of eyes. Still, these books in the picture were not enough. I didn't want to risk to raise things higher, and instead took an old small stool.
Not a discovery #2: you can look into the lens as close as you want, if there is enough magnifying and depth.
Discovery #3: the monitor looks very different. Things look like real-life-size! And the screen covers large FOV, which changes perception a lot! You can percept your car shaking with a different sense: if you roll over, it "feels" like you are rolling and hitting the ground. (You need "1g head move" parameters to be >0, about 0.03 m)
Discovery #4, not good: the picture is a bit blurry. Colours "leak" a bit, and the picture is not as shar as without the lens. Reduce the distance between the lens and monitor to reduce magnifying factor and also draw back from the lens, to reduce the angles of refraction. So, again a trade-off: FOV vs sharpness.
Discovery #5: it is better to use the lens in a dark room. I'll make a box, black lustreless inside, but still the light in the room will make glares.
And, is it worth it?
What do you think?
What do you think?
Yes, it does. I like it, and the small visit-card-lenses are cool thingies.
Worked on my X800XT at least, didn't try it for very long as my monitors were of different size etc.
Anyone used a Fresnel Lens with LFS?
(89 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG