Quote:
All else being equal (regarding resolution from center to edge, contrast, transmission, color purity, etc...), if I had the option to see a real field of 77 degrees within an apparent field of 68 degrees, vs. seeing a real field of 77 degrees spread over an apparent field of 82 degrees, I would choose the former, since my eye would be able to take in the same real field of view far more comfortably, with less wandering of the eye required to absorb the exact same chunk of sky.
You would rather have -11.7% angular magnification distortion than +6.1%? OK, I guess maybe I can see that, but where do you draw the line? How about an RFoV of 400 degrees in an AFoV of, say, 50. Of course there's a teensy bit of negative angular magnification distortion there, only about -700%, but it fits a lot of sky in 50 degrees! How much is too much?
|