中国地图坐标(GCJ-02)偏移算法破解小史

文章转载自http://blog.genglinxiao.com/中国地图坐标偏移算法破解小史/

2006年,Google开始与AutoNavi合作使用后者所提供的中国地图。这应该是外企首次接触到这个问题。

从2009年开始,中国地图的坐标偏移开始为外界所知。Garmin的用户发现在美国购买的GPS到了中国几乎无法使用,而在中国购买的Garmin产品则没有问题。Google Maps API的使用者发现兴趣点无法被准确标注在中国地图上。更有意思的是,有用户反复就此报告bug给Google,却从未得到任何回应。类似的,Garmin也声称自己没有解决方案,建议客户在需要的情况下在中国境内购买GPS设备。

于此同时,各路豪杰开始尝试破解这种偏移算法。其中有两条路径值得注意:

2010年1月,网友wuyongzheng发现:

I accidentally found the Chinese version of Google Map ditu.google.com to be able to correlate satellite image with map, and it gives the amount of deviation for any location in China. This URL queries the deviation of 34.29273N,108.94695E (Xi’an): http://ditu.google.com/maps/vp?spn=0.001,0.001&t=h&z=18&vp=$34.29273,108.94695 (seems it’ doesn’t work now)

有了足够的数据,wuyongzheng建议使用回归算法来逼近这个偏移算法:https://wuyongzheng.wordpress.com/2010/01/22/china-map-deviation-as-a-regression-problem/

在此之前的尝试都是零星的,针对个别城市的。wuongzheng的这个建议算是在全面系统地解决这个问题上迈出了第一步。

2013年5月,Maxime Guilbot根据这个建议得到4-5米精度的逼近:

https://github.com/maxime/ChinaMapDeviation

2013年10月,wuyongzheng自己进行了回归,得到如下结果:

http://wuyongzheng.github.io/china-map-deviation/paper.html

Maxime Guibot和wuyongzheng的回归结果基本代表了在黑暗中摸索的最佳结果,因此得到了广泛的注意和应用。

在另一条路径上,2010年4月,emq project增加了一个文件,Converter.java:

http://emq.googlecode.com/svn/emq/src/Algorithm/Coords/Converter.java

这段代码可以以很高的精度把WGS-84坐标转换到GCJ-02坐标。

2013年2月,这段代码被网友coolypf注意到,整理后用到了他自己的项目中:

https://on4wp7.codeplex.com/SourceControl/changeset/view/21483#353936

其中的关键代码值得贴在这里:

        const double pi = 3.14159265358979324;

        //
        // Krasovsky 1940
        //
        // a = 6378245.0, 1/f = 298.3
        // b = a * (1 - f)
        // ee = (a^2 - b^2) / a^2;
        const double a = 6378245.0;
        const double ee = 0.00669342162296594323;

        //
        // World Geodetic System ==> Mars Geodetic System
        public static void transform(double wgLat, double wgLon, out double mgLat, out double mgLon)
        {
            if (outOfChina(wgLat, wgLon))
            {
                mgLat = wgLat;
                mgLon = wgLon;
                return;
            }
            double dLat = transformLat(wgLon - 105.0, wgLat - 35.0);
            double dLon = transformLon(wgLon - 105.0, wgLat - 35.0);
            double radLat = wgLat / 180.0 * pi;
            double magic = Math.Sin(radLat);
            magic = 1 - ee * magic * magic;
            double sqrtMagic = Math.Sqrt(magic);
            dLat = (dLat * 180.0) / ((a * (1 - ee)) / (magic * sqrtMagic) * pi);
            dLon = (dLon * 180.0) / (a / sqrtMagic * Math.Cos(radLat) * pi);
            mgLat = wgLat + dLat;
            mgLon = wgLon + dLon;
        }

2013年3月,coolypf在自己的博客中介绍了这一段代码:

http://blog.csdn.net/coolypf/article/details/8686588

2014年9月,wuyongzheng注意到了coolypf的项目。至此,两条路径合流,坐标偏移问题基本得到了完美解决。

从上面的代码可以看出,相对于WGS-84,GCJ-02一方面采用了不同的参考椭球体(SK-42, Krasovsky。应该属于前苏联影响的遗留),另一方面引入了高频非线性偏移。

扩展阅读
现代版掩耳盗铃:GPS漂移
关于流传的 WGS-84 至 GCJ-02 转换算法

百度云与其相关证书

在不安装百度全家桶的前提下使用百度的云储存,我使用的是绿色版百度云5.5.2。
并且使用了liwei同学提供的流氓软件终结者来防范更多的国产垃圾软件。
使用流氓软件终结者后百度云会提示“应用程序被修改 请重新安装”,这是由于吊销了百度的一个证书所致。

查看证书 Win+R certmgr.msc
不信任的证书中有百度的三个证书,状态是已被颁发机构吊销。
因为是吊销所以这时候就无法使用证书管理器里重新信任证书,查看终结者的两个批处理与certregister文件夹得知是通过注册表来实现吊销证书的。
实测BaiduDown对应的证书与绿色版百度云相关,我们来查看下BaiduDown.reg的内容,他是增加了注册表键值HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\SystemCertificates\Disallowed\Certificates\ACAED4BE8C729A6AE5F4F82F5F183A9C4EBE7AE3

那么把ACAED4BE8C729A6AE5F4F82F5F183A9C4EBE7AE3这个键删掉就恢复了该证书。
也可以在运行屏蔽批处理前将certregister\BaiduDown.reg删除掉来百度云留条活路。

于是又能用基本不限速的百度云了。

询问开发者得知,该证书屏蔽的是从百度源高速下载的捆绑有百度全家桶的软件,若未吊销该证书,下载软件请自行注意。

在Windows10环境中使用Imacon FlexTight Photo

Imacon FlexTight Photo是很老的扫描仪了
随便搜了下 能看到2001年讨论国外翻译来的测试帖 隐约得知2000年前的价格在一万美元
2000年的时候美元兑人民币可是在8.28的高位,那时候牛肉面才三块钱……

好的现在时间回到了美元兑人民币6.97而牛肉面12元一碗的2016年底
Windows系统也从98打折到了10
网上大部分人都认为Imacon FlexTight Photo扫描仪只能在Windows XP下驱动
哈?Windows可是兼容性最强的系统诶,曾经有人在虚拟机里测试过从3.1一路升级到Windows 10
先前在Windows 7的环境下成功驱动就证明还能再战十年
所以我们来看看怎么在Windows 10下驱动

好懒啊我不想说测试过程了
直接说结果

首先需要一块Adaptec SCSI Card 2915/2930LP 的SCSI卡
SCSI卡的驱动是
u160_w7_ws08r2_x64_drv_b7_5_645_100.exe
MD5:5f937d6a6cbb395efc4a4eff36316d92
SHA1:3f71d5aad8273990618676c7e42073995dff83cc
CRC32:ef1a945e
File Size:176,198

然后你会需要一个扫描驱动
hamric_sannner_1007_64_316.exe
MD5:31263e054b648e13917c1242557a87f9
SHA1:86f0533e53123dbd638024a09492aed1202d3988
CRC32:d8fb9573
File Size:717,656

最后你还需要一个扫描软件
fc403_eng.zip
MD5:91faf7949919865b307c39716cb7f6b1
SHA1:2ae54f7440640915c66cf5aaeb4c1e07dbd13563
CRC32:05f537b0
File Size:19,821,197

需要值得注意的是安装驱动请在设备管理器里指定到驱动解压文件夹自动识别安装,FlexColor需要在安全模式下用管理员权限安装。
然后就可以使用啦

没错 就这么简单(实际我折腾了115分钟)

别人说的用不了啊 要改配置文件啊 都是错的

半年前美元还不到6.5呢……唉

******2017年更新******

扫描驱动扫描驱动hamric_sannner_1007_64_316.exe其实是驱动之家打包的自解压文件,真实驱动是Hamrick Software提供的SCSI Scanner驱动。

FlexColor并不需要在安全模式下安装。

THE CHART OF COSMIC EXPLORATION

Probe the solar system from Mercury to Pluto with this stellar schematic of space exploration! From the Luna 2 in 1959 to the DSCOVR in 2015, this color-coded chart traces the trajectories of every orbiter, lander, rover, flyby, and impactor to ever slip the surly bonds of Earth’s orbit and successfully complete its mission—a truly astronomical array of over 100 exploratory instruments in all. Featuring hand-illustrated renderings of each spacecraft juxtaposed against the serried giants of our solar system, this galactic survey is a testament to man’s forays into the grand cosmic ballet.

THE CHART OF COSMIC EXPLORATION

Download

非对称俯仰

我们今天来讨论一下非对称俯仰(asymmetrical tlit)对焦。
使用大画幅相机的时候,可以借助沙姆定律(Scheimpflug principle)来获得全景深的画面。
沙姆定律的实现需要至少有一个基座根据景物的位置绕水平方向轴(俯仰)或垂直方向轴(摇摆)进行调整才能完成。需要注意的是相机前组的俯仰与摇摆不会改变被摄物投影的形状,只会改变清晰的平面;相机后组的俯仰与摇摆会同时改变被摄物的投影形状与清晰平面。
在实际操作中,优先考虑改变前组并优先考虑俯仰。选择画面中需要同时清晰的两点H与H1……先对焦到H将相机前组俯仰倾斜一个角度使H1清晰这时H将会模糊再微调对焦再微调俯仰倾斜角度再微调对焦再微调俯仰倾斜角度再微调对焦再微调俯仰倾斜角度……嗯,这时候在某一个俯仰角度和某一个对焦距离下,可以使得H与H1同时清晰。
挺麻烦的对不对?
仙娜的单轨相机利用了非对称俯仰方式对焦巧妙地解决了这个问题,让我们来看一下图。

Sinar P2

图中所示是仙娜的专业单轨相机 Sinar P2,它的俯仰机构在后组对焦屏下方,进行俯仰操作时后组沿着弧形滑轨以图中标注的黄点为轴心转动。俯仰轴处于焦平面上,整个俯仰过程中轴不动,对焦屏上旋转轴参考线所在位置会一直保持清晰。相当于保持H点不动去通过俯仰动作寻找H1点的清晰。当H1清晰时,相机后组会呈倾斜状态,这时被摄物的投影透视关系是被改变的。读出俯仰角度数值,将后组归零将前组调节至该数值,就变成了以前组完成俯仰动作,并且不改变透视,H点和H1点也都清晰啦!想想还是很神奇的呢。

在商业摄影中使用会极其方便,但是风光摄影中一般不会携带Sinar P2这种沉重的相机,现在我们来看一下以轻便为主打的沙慕尼相机(Chamonix)如何完成非对称俯仰。

Chamonix 45-F1

沙慕尼45-F1在后组设计了一个独立的弧形机构,可以让后组沿着弧形滑轨俯仰。弧形滑轨的旋转轴也是在焦平面上,俯仰时轴所在位置焦点不变。不过沙慕尼相机无法读取俯仰角度,也就无法将后组俯仰角度调至前组,将会不可避免的造成画面透视的改变。不过这个精巧的小机构可以非常快速的完成沙姆定律调焦,避免了繁琐的调整,为风光摄影时可能出现的抢光线赢取了时间。

延伸阅读:
相机操作动作解释:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JU-eHpk97Y
非对称动作手册:http://www.ebonycamera.com/media/asymmetrical.movements.pdf
相机移轴技术图解:https://www.douban.com/group/topic/33430875/

顶楼停车场

原文地址:https://www.douban.com/note/553252723/
作者:https://www.douban.com/people/mumudancing/

顶楼停车场

开车上顶楼停车场的时候,我前面的越野车忽然停了下来。

它挺大,就那么卡在了半坡。我踩住刹车,冲它摁了两声喇叭。

它还是停着,没有动静,我也停着。

我忽然觉得,哪也去不了了。

这个顶楼停车场十几年前是一座山。山被削平,高楼耸起,就是这几年的事。至于几年前山是怎样的,我不记得了,也没人记得了。

我上一次来,坐在车里读完了一本书。开着灯在那读,直到启动的时候发现车已无法启动,电瓶的电耗光了,我喊来了保险公司的人。

我才不会和人说因为在车里读书才把电耗光的,那听起来有点愚蠢。我和来充电的人说,我昨天把车停在这,忘记了关灯。

对,忘记关灯,多好的理由。他们也不过觉得你是无数个忘记关灯的人之一,充好电也不会带着嘲笑走人。

如果我说读书读到没电,他们一定会记住我,以后就一直笑话我。

停车场的楼下,是座酒店。当然——就是你想象的那种,酒店。

我和他来过几次。

起先我们只是去酒店二楼的咖啡馆,聊点事。聊了什么,我也不记得了,那不重要。

我只记得他和我说到家里的一个什么人时,我忽然觉得有点不同。

噢,说到他的爸爸。

他说他的爸爸,小时候就离开了他,去了很远的地方。

从那一刻开始,我觉得眼前的咖啡有点不同。

其实喝咖啡只是吃完饭的第二件事。甚至是吃饭前的事。

我们吃饭的时候没什么话,但是吃完饭他总说,去喝点什么吧。

于是我们会坐在一起,又喝第二杯咖啡。他喝的是美式,我喝的是拿铁。从我们认识那天起就没变过。

我不大和他聊自己所生活的窘境。

住在郊区、欠着100万的房贷、每天的停车费和餐费一样多、看中的衣服早已不是什么H&M和GAP,我甚至嫌弃它们一点也不环保,转而消费很贵的衣服,随着很贵的衣服又自然配上很贵的包……总之,一切都变得越来越糟糕。

但是他所看到的我,还算是体面的。

当然,那上面昂贵的一切都支撑了我眼前的体面。

如果换一种描述,我就是个拥有房子、车子、奢侈品的女人。我仿佛拥有了一切。

可我知道,鬼扯蛋,我欠这世界一屁股债。

但好在我保养得不错,坚持锻炼——当然,健身卡又是一笔不小的开支——每年我在续卡上总不会犹豫。

想到自己可以在冬天游泳,在周天的早晨跑步,我总觉得,那是很酷的生活。

又或许,这一切都是电视广告里营造的中产阶级假象吧。健身房里所有的瑜伽球都像泡沫。

至于那些健身教练……不,我对他们一点也没有兴趣。我甚至觉得,他们和快时尚橱窗里的假模特差不多。

当然,这一切渴求又批判的挣扎我不会和他讲。

我们俩只是坐在这里喝杯咖啡。——能喝到第二杯的,说明还有些缘分。更何况也喝了好几次了,都喝到了第二杯,慢慢就成了我们的习惯。

“我们”——有点别扭,毕竟我们不大认识。

他这个人,怎么说呢,很有风度。换个词,体面,大概就是吸引我的地方。

我觉得他也是这么想我的。所以我们才能坐在一起。

体面包括我们对周遭的态度,不仅是穿着。尽管我的身后有十分糟糕窘迫的一切,但表面看起来,我是一个成熟、理智的人,我不大会像那些20多岁的小女生叽叽喳喳个不停,还拿着自拍杆一整晚都在对着自己僵硬的脸修图。大多数时候,我都保持沉默。

我喜欢听人说话。而他的话不算多,正好。

一般我们谈到九点,我就会回去了。我独自去顶楼停车场取车,自己开回家。他坐地铁回去。我们就像两个普通的朋友,在社交的限定时间里拧好发条,到点停下。

但到第四还是第五次的时候,他打破了这个规矩。

他跟着我上了顶楼停车场,坐进了我的车。我连车子都没来得及启动,什么就发生了。

是什么呢?

也没什么。

有时候我想想,我们都是人类。人类是一种具备本能和本性的动物。而动物,有没有道德?

“小说是不讲道德的。”

他有几次这么说。——我们都喜欢读小说。

如果把当下发生的一切当作小说,我们就自然给自己树起了屏障。在这个屏障之内,人是自然,自然就是自然。

那之后我们就习惯把喝第二杯咖啡的时间改作去酒店。

这是家还行的酒店,说不上很好,但也算体面。——体面充斥了我们的生活。

我们会观察房间里的一切,细节——拖鞋的厚度、纸巾的厚度、沐浴液的品牌、矿泉水的品牌、窗外的景象、床上有多少枕头……都是我们注意评判的一切。

因为到这个份上,大家都不大会去什么青年旅舍随便住一晚了。只想说,我没那么便宜,你也没那么便宜。我们既然来到了这里喝咖啡,就不会打车去汉庭。那多扫兴。

于是体面又让我的生活更多了一层窘迫;当然,也有快乐。

我从未问过他的真实生活。

什么叫真实呢?他即使说了,我也不一定信。

他说他住在两站地铁以外的地方,我完全有理由相信,那里还住着一个人。

他说他没结过婚,可我看得到手上的戒指痕。

他说他已经太久单身,我除了相信他和我在一起的时候单身,没法证明这时间空间以外他是单身。

所以,我什么也没问。

成人有证伪的能力,只是不愿去证。

我想有很多人还不明白,自己能够拥有平静的生活,全凭有人发发善心假装了愚蠢。

诚实又聪明,对大家都没什么好处。

不过还好,我能和这个一起喝咖啡的人一起去酒店,就说明他有什么不凡的魅力。

我们甚至能坐在床上一起聊天,看电视,甚至看电影,评论严肃的社会新闻。这都是他的特别之处。

能够交流一小部分想法,让我们睡到了一起。虽然有时想想,这样也挺可悲,值得怜悯的人类。

而即使那一小部分的想法,也会让我们觉得温暖。我倒有些瞬间真的觉得,自己不是那么糟糕的,那些拥有的和欠下的外在之物,不过是我假装的愚蠢。

他是个聪明的人,到九点钟,准时起身走人。

我们像什么都没发生。他去地铁,我去顶楼停车场。我们各自回去。

我感谢他支付房费,延缓了我下个月的糟糕。这样我还有钱继续购物、健身、保养车子、做体面的发型,一切平稳有序。

如果不是那样,他也就不会和我走到一起了。我心知肚明。

如果我把钱用去了支付不菲的房费,那很快我们就会陷入窘境。我会坐地铁来,连前面的饭也不吃,就径直走向酒店。如果往后继续下去,我们可能真的打车去汉庭——不无可能。

但我说什么呢,有人能够过着平静的生活,全凭有人发发善心假装愚蠢。在我和他的这件事上,我感谢他,做了那个假装愚蠢的人。

所以我还能维持一切不变,他也看起来很平静。

有几次我都主动示弱了,我说我们换个地方吧,换个便宜的,这样我们就可以消费更多的夜晚。他却始终大度,说这里就很好,为什么要换。

他的体面一次又一次感动了我,让我不自觉的要把车停得更久些。即使一小时30块又怎样呢,和这里的房费相比,我付出的真不算多。

只要我能好好地呆到9点,或者9点半,甚至10点,我都觉得人生还是有希望的。

我回家面对糟糕的账单和愚蠢的老公的时间,会在生命里减少一些。

这让我好受。

不过作为一个成年人,我知道好日子都不会太久。

我们有应对的勇气,却不知道真正的糟糕什么时候来。

最开始让我觉得糟糕的,是我发现他就在这个酒店工作。

不过我没有揭穿他——他偷房间,我能住好的酒店,大家鱼水之欢,没什么损失。只要我继续假装不知道就好。

而真正糟糕的是什么呢?

是一个瞬间,它突然就来了。

就在我卡在去顶楼停车场的那个半坡。

因为停得太久我看清了副驾上坐的人,他也看到了我。

我怎么不知道他呢,他每晚就睡在我的旁边。

他怎么看不到我的车牌号呢,我的灯打得那么亮。

但在通往顶楼停车场的半坡上,我们都没下车。

我们就停在那里,一动也不动。

CHINESE AND WESTERN CIVILIZATION CONTRASTED

CHINESE AND WESTERN CIVILIZATION CONTRASTED

By Bertrand Russell

There is at present in China, as we have seen in previous chapters, a close contact between our civilization and that which is native to the Celestial Empire. It is still a doubtful question whether this contact will breed a new civilization better than either of its parents, or whether it will merely destroy the native culture and replace it by that of America. Contacts between different civilizations have often in the past proved to be landmarks in human progress. Greece learnt from Egypt, Rome from Greece, the Arabs from the Roman Empire, medieval Europe from the Arabs, and Renaissance Europe from the Byzantines. In many of these cases, the pupils proved better than their masters. In the case of China, if we regard the Chinese as the pupils, this may be the case again. In fact, we have quite as much to learn from them as they from us, but there is far less chance of our learning it. If I treat the Chinese as our pupils, rather than vice versa, it is only because I fear we are unteachable.

I propose in this chapter to deal with the purely cultural aspects of the questions raised by the contact of China with the West. In the three following chapters, I shall deal with questions concerning the internal condition of China, returning finally, in a concluding chapter, to the hopes for the future which are permissible in the present difficult situation.

With the exception of Spain and America in the sixteenth century, I cannot think of any instance of two civilizations coming into contact after such a long period of separate development as has marked those of China and Europe. Considering this extraordinary separateness, it is surprising that mutual understanding between Europeans and Chinese is not more difficult. In order to make this point clear, it will be worth while to dwell for a moment on the historical origins of the two civilizations.

Western Europe and America have a practically homogeneous mental life, which I should trace to three sources: (1) Greek culture; (2) Jewish religion and ethics; (3) modern industrialism, which itself is an outcome of modern science. We may take Plato, the Old Testament, and Galileo as representing these three elements, which have remained singularly separable down to the present day. From the Greeks we derive literature and the arts, philosophy and pure mathematics; also the more urbane portions of our social outlook. From the Jews we derive fanatical belief, which its friends call “faith”; moral fervour, with the conception of sin; religious intolerance, and some part of our nationalism. From science, as applied in industrialism, we derive power and the sense of power, the belief that we are as gods, and may justly be, the arbiters of life and death for unscientific races. We derive also the empirical method, by which almost all real knowledge has been acquired. These three elements, I think, account for most of our mentality.

No one of these three elements has had any appreciable part in the development of China, except that Greece indirectly influenced Chinese painting, sculpture, and music. China belongs, in the dawn of its history, to the great river empires, of which Egypt and Babylonia contributed to our origins, by the influence which they had upon the Greeks and Jews. Just as these civilizations were rendered possible by the rich alluvial soil of the Nile, the Euphrates, and the Tigris, so the original civilization of China was rendered possible by the Yellow River. Even in the time of Confucius, the Chinese Empire did not stretch far either to south or north of the Yellow River. But in spite of this similarity in physical and economic circumstances, there was very little in common between the mental outlook of the Chinese and that of the Egyptians and Babylonians. Lao-Tze and Confucius, who both belong to the sixth century B.C., have already the characteristics which we should regard as distinctive of the modern Chinese. People who attribute everything to economic causes would be hard put to it to account for the differences between the ancient Chinese and the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians. For my part, I have no alternative theory to offer. I do not think science can, at present, account wholly for national character. Climate and economic circumstances account for part, but not the whole. Probably a great deal depends upon the character of dominant individuals who happen to emerge at a formative period, such as Moses, Mahomet, and Confucius.

The oldest known Chinese sage is Lao-Tze, the founder of Taoism. “Lao Tze” is not really a proper name, but means merely “the old philosopher.” He was (according to tradition) an older contemporary of Confucius, and his philosophy is to my mind far more interesting. He held that every person, every animal, and every thing has a certain way or manner of behaving which is natural to him, or her, or it, and that we ought to conform to this way ourselves and encourage others to conform to it. “Tao” means “way,” but used in a more or less mystical sense, as in the text: “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life.” I think he fancied that death was due to departing from the “way,” and that if we all lived strictly according to nature we should be immortal, like the heavenly bodies. In later times Taoism degenerated into mere magic, and was largely concerned with the search for the elixir of life. But I think the hope of escaping from death was an element in Taoist philosophy from the first.

Lao-Tze’s book, or rather the book attributed to him, is very short, but his ideas were developed by his disciple Chuang-Tze, who is more interesting than his master. The philosophy which both advocated was one of freedom. They thought ill of government, and of all interferences with Nature. They complained of the hurry of modern life, which they contrasted with the calm existence of those whom they called “the pure men of old.” There is a flavour of mysticism in the doctrine of the Tao, because in spite of the multiplicity of living things the Tao is in some sense one, so that if all live according to it there will be no strife in the world. But both sages have already the Chinese characteristics of humour, restraint, and under-statement. Their humour is illustrated by Chuang-Tze’s account of Po-Lo who “understood the management of horses,” and trained them till five out of every ten died.[95] Their restraint and under-statement are evident when they are compared with Western mystics. Both characteristics belong to all Chinese literature and art, and to the conversation of cultivated Chinese in the present day. All classes in China are fond of laughter, and never miss a chance of a joke. In the educated classes, the humour is sly and delicate, so that Europeans often fail to see it, which adds to the enjoyment of the Chinese. Their habit of under-statement is remarkable. I met one day in Peking a middle-aged man who told me he was academically interested in the theory of politics; being new to the country, I took his statement at its face value, but I afterwards discovered that he had been governor of a province, and had been for many years a very prominent politician. In Chinese poetry there is an apparent absence of passion which is due to the same practice of under-statement. They consider that a wise man should always remain calm, and though they have their passionate moments (being in fact a very excitable race), they do not wish to perpetuate them in art, because they think ill of them. Our romantic movement, which led people to like vehemence, has, so far as I know, no analogue in their literature. Their old music, some of which is very beautiful, makes so little noise that one can only just hear it. In art they aim at being exquisite, and in life at being reasonable. There is no admiration for the ruthless strong man, or for the unrestrained expression of passion. After the more blatant life of the West, one misses at first all the effects at which they are aiming; but gradually the beauty and dignity of their existence become visible, so that the foreigners who have lived longest in China are those who love the Chinese best.

The Taoists, though they survive as magicians, were entirely ousted from the favour of the educated classes by Confucianism. I must confess that I am unable to appreciate the merits of Confucius. His writings are largely occupied with trivial points of etiquette, and his main concern is to teach people how to behave correctly on various occasions. When one compares him, however, with the traditional religious teachers of some other ages and races, one must admit that he has great merits, even if they are mainly negative. His system, as developed by his followers, is one of pure ethics, without religious dogma; it has not given rise to a powerful priesthood, and it has not led to persecution. It certainly has succeeded in producing a whole nation possessed of exquisite manners and perfect courtesy. Nor is Chinese courtesy merely conventional; it is quite as reliable in situations for which no precedent has been provided. And it is not confined to one class; it exists even in the humblest coolie. It is humiliating to watch the brutal insolence of white men received by the Chinese with a quiet dignity which cannot demean itself to answer rudeness with rudeness. Europeans often regard this as weakness, but it is really strength, the strength by which the Chinese have hitherto conquered all their conquerors.

There is one, and only one, important foreign element in the traditional civilization of China, and that is Buddhism. Buddhism came to China from India in the early centuries of the Christian era, and acquired a definite place in the religion of the country. We, with the intolerant outlook which we have taken over from the Jews, imagine that if a man adopts one religion he cannot adopt another. The dogmas of Christianity and Mohammedanism, in their orthodox forms, are so framed that no man can accept both. But in China this incompatibility does not exist; a man may be both a Buddhist and a Confucian, because nothing in either is incompatible with the other. In Japan, similarly, most people are both Buddhists and Shintoists. Nevertheless there is a temperamental difference between Buddhism and Confucianism, which will cause any individual to lay stress on one or other even if he accepts both. Buddhism is a religion in the sense in which we understand the word. It has mystic doctrines and a way of salvation and a future life. It has a message to the world intended to cure the despair which it regards as natural to those who have no religious faith. It assumes an instinctive pessimism only to be cured by some gospel. Confucianism has nothing of all this. It assumes people fundamentally at peace with the world, wanting only instruction as to how to live, not encouragement to live at all. And its ethical instruction is not based upon any metaphysical or religious dogma; it is purely mundane. The result of the co-existence of these two religions in China has been that the more religious and contemplative natures turned to Buddhism, while the active administrative type was content with Confucianism, which was always the official teaching, in which candidates for the civil service were examined. The result is that for many ages the Government of China has been in the hands of literary sceptics, whose administration has been lacking in those qualities of energy and destructiveness which Western nations demand of their rulers. In fact, they have conformed very closely to the maxims of Chuang-Tze. The result has been that the population has been happy except where civil war brought misery; that subject nations have been allowed autonomy; and that foreign nations have had no need to fear China, in spite of its immense population and resources.

Comparing the civilization of China with that of Europe, one finds in China most of what was to be found in Greece, but nothing of the other two elements of our civilization, namely Judaism and science. China is practically destitute of religion, not only in the upper classes, but throughout the population. There is a very definite ethical code, but it is not fierce or persecuting, and does not contain the notion “sin.” Except quite recently, through European influence, there has been no science and no industrialism.

What will be the outcome of the contact of this ancient civilization with the West? I am not thinking of the political or economic outcome, but of the effect on the Chinese mental outlook. It is difficult to dissociate the two questions altogether, because of course the cultural contact with the West must be affected by the nature of the political and economic contact. Nevertheless, I wish to consider the cultural question as far as I can in isolation.

There is, in China, a great eagerness to acquire Western learning, not simply in order to acquire national strength and be able to resist Western aggression, but because a very large number of people consider learning a good thing in itself. It is traditional in China to place a high value on knowledge, but in old days the knowledge sought was only of the classical literature. Nowadays it is generally realized that Western knowledge is more useful. Many students go every year to universities in Europe, and still more to America, to learn science or economics or law or political theory. These men, when they return to China, mostly become teachers or civil servants or journalists or politicians. They are rapidly modernizing the Chinese outlook, especially in the educated classes.

The traditional civilization of China had become unprogressive, and had ceased to produce much of value in the way of art and literature. This was not due, I think, to any decadence in the race, but merely to lack of new material. The influx of Western knowledge provides just the stimulus that was needed. Chinese students are able and extraordinarily keen. Higher education suffers from lack of funds and absence of libraries, but does not suffer from any lack of the finest human material. Although Chinese civilization has hitherto been deficient in science, it never contained anything hostile to science, and therefore the spread of scientific knowledge encounters no such obstacles as the Church put in its way in Europe. I have no doubt that if the Chinese could get a stable government and sufficient funds, they would, within the next thirty years, begin to produce remarkable work in science. It is quite likely that they might outstrip us, because they come with fresh zest and with all the ardour of a renaissance. In fact, the enthusiasm for learning in Young China reminds one constantly of the renaissance spirit in fifteenth-century Italy.

It is very remarkable, as distinguishing the Chinese from the Japanese, that the things they wish to learn from us are not those that bring wealth or military strength, but rather those that have either an ethical and social value, or a purely intellectual interest. They are not by any means uncritical of our civilization. Some of them told me that they were less critical before 1914, but that the war made them think there must be imperfections in the Western manner of life. The habit of looking to the West for wisdom was, however, very strong, and some of the younger ones thought that Bolshevism could give what they were looking for. That hope also must be suffering disappointment, and before long they will realize that they must work out their own salvation by means of a new synthesis. The Japanese adopted our faults and kept their own, but it is possible to hope that the Chinese will make the opposite selection, keeping their own merits and adopting ours.

The distinctive merit of our civilization, I should say, is the scientific method; the distinctive merit of the Chinese is a just conception of the ends of life. It is these two that one must hope to see gradually uniting.

Lao-Tze describes the operation of Tao as “production without possession, action without self-assertion, development without domination.” I think one could derive from these words a conception of the ends of life as reflective Chinese see them, and it must be admitted that they are very different from the ends which most white men set before themselves. Possession, self-assertion, domination, are eagerly sought, both nationally and individually. They have been erected into a philosophy by Nietzsche, and Nietzsche’s disciples are not confined to Germany.

But, it will be said, you have been comparing Western practice with Chinese theory; if you had compared Western theory with Chinese practice, the balance would have come out quite differently. There is, of course, a great deal of truth in this. Possession, which is one of the three things that Lao-Tze wishes us to forego, is certainly dear to the heart of the average Chinaman. As a race, they are tenacious of money—not perhaps more so than the French, but certainly more than the English or the Americans. Their politics are corrupt, and their powerful men make money in disgraceful ways. All this it is impossible to deny.

Nevertheless, as regards the other two evils, self-assertion and domination, I notice a definite superiority to ourselves in Chinese practice. There is much less desire than among the white races to tyrannize over other people. The weakness of China internationally is quite as much due to this virtue as to the vices of corruption and so on which are usually assigned as the sole reason. If any nation in the world could ever be “too proud to fight,” that nation would be China. The natural Chinese attitude is one of tolerance and friendliness, showing courtesy and expecting it in return. If the Chinese chose, they could be the most powerful nation in the world. But they only desire freedom, not domination. It is not improbable that other nations may compel them to fight for their freedom, and if so, they may lose their virtues and acquire a taste for empire. But at present, though they have been an imperial race for 2,000 years, their love of empire is extraordinarily slight.

Although there have been many wars in China, the natural outlook of the Chinese is very pacifistic. I do not know of any other country where a poet would have chosen, as Po-Chui did in one of the poems translated by Mr. Waley, called by him The Old Man with the Broken Arm, to make a hero of a recruit who maimed himself to escape military service. Their pacifism is rooted in their contemplative outlook, and in the fact that they do not desire to change whatever they see. They take a pleasure—as their pictures show—in observing characteristic manifestations of different kinds of life, and they have no wish to reduce everything to a preconceived pattern. They have not the ideal of progress which dominates the Western nations, and affords a rationalization of our active impulses. Progress is, of course, a very modern ideal even with us; it is part of what we owe to science and industrialism. The cultivated conservative Chinese of the present day talk exactly as their earliest sages write. If one points out to them that this shows how little progress there has been, they will say: “Why seek progress when you already enjoy what is excellent?” At first, this point of view seems to a European unduly indolent; but gradually doubts as to one’s own wisdom grow up, and one begins to think that much of what we call progress is only restless change, bringing us no nearer to any desirable goal.

It is interesting to contrast what the Chinese have sought in the West with what the West has sought in China. The Chinese in the West seek knowledge, in the hope—which I fear is usually vain—that knowledge may prove a gateway to wisdom. White men have gone to China with three motives: to fight, to make money, and to convert the Chinese to our religion. The last of these motives has the merit of being idealistic, and has inspired many heroic lives. But the soldier, the merchant, and the missionary are alike concerned to stamp our civilization upon the world; they are all three, in a certain sense, pugnacious. The Chinese have no wish to convert us to Confucianism; they say “religions are many, but reason is one,” and with that they are content to let us go our way. They are good merchants, but their methods are quite different from those of European merchants in China, who are perpetually seeking concessions, monopolies, railways, and mines, and endeavouring to get their claims supported by gunboats. The Chinese are not, as a rule, good soldiers, because the causes for which they are asked to fight are not worth fighting for, and they know it. But that is only a proof of their reasonableness.

I think the tolerance of the Chinese is in excess of anything that Europeans can imagine from their experience at home. We imagine ourselves tolerant, because we are more so than our ancestors. But we still practise political and social persecution, and what is more, we are firmly persuaded that our civilization and our way of life are immeasurably better than any other, so that when we come across a nation like the Chinese, we are convinced that the kindest thing we can do to them is to make them like ourselves. I believe this to be a profound mistake. It seemed to me that the average Chinaman, even if he is miserably poor, is happier than the average Englishman, and is happier because the nation is built upon a more humane and civilized outlook than our own. Restlessness and pugnacity not only cause obvious evils, but fill our lives with discontent, incapacitate us for the enjoyment of beauty, and make us almost incapable of the contemplative virtues. In this respect we have grown rapidly worse during the last hundred years. I do not deny that the Chinese go too far in the other direction; but for that very reason I think contact between East and West is likely to be fruitful to both parties. They may learn from us the indispensable minimum of practical efficiency, and we may learn from them something of that contemplative wisdom which has enabled them to persist while all the other nations of antiquity have perished.

When I went to China, I went to teach; but every day that I stayed I thought less of what I had to teach them and more of what I had to learn from them. Among Europeans who had lived a long time in China, I found this attitude not uncommon; but among those whose stay is short, or who go only to make money, it is sadly rare. It is rare because the Chinese do not excel in the things we really value—military prowess and industrial enterprise. But those who value wisdom or beauty, or even the simple enjoyment of life, will find more of these things in China than in the distracted and turbulent West, and will be happy to live where such things are valued. I wish I could hope that China, in return for our scientific knowledge, may give us something of her large tolerance and contemplative peace of mind.

现代版掩耳盗铃:GPS漂移

 

如果要列出由屁股决定脑袋的政策,GPS漂移完全可以列入其中,高居前列。中国以保密的理由强制性要求在中国提供服务的地图产品加入“地形图非线性保密处理技术”,去人为偏移GPS坐标,导致地图上的位置与实际地理位置存在100-600米左右的随机偏差。这项技术的主要发明者叫李成名,是测绘科学研究院地图学与GIS所所长,他为此获得了国家科技进步一等奖。这项技术除了给本国居民带来麻烦外,给官方测绘机构创造收益外,对其他国家没有任何实质意义,可称得上现代版的掩耳盗铃。在国外,地图采用的坐标系统是世界测地系统1984或简称为WGS-84,中国强制性要求使用的坐标系统叫GCJ-02,又称为火星坐标,人为使用(邪恶的)算法制造偏差。谷歌地图和高德地图都使用了这个坐标系,要正确获得一个位置的坐标,需要纠偏。

EL-NIKKOR放大镜头

最近没什么原创内容
这样不好 不好
然而这又是一篇转载文章 哎

尼康公司向市场推出了13支焦距40mm至360mm的专业放大镜头,做工精良牢固,镀膜工艺优异,一流的清晰度在专业摄影界一直是有口皆碑。由于EL-NIKKOR 180mm、210mm、240mm、300mm和360mm这5支镜头是专为放制5×7至10×12英寸底片所设计的,使用量很小。所以本文向读者介绍的是常用焦距段的40mm至150mm八支镜头。
  当您初识EL-NIKKOR镜头群时,会被它们精良的做工,非常坚固的镜身,优异的镀膜工艺所吸引,对职业放大镜头的信任感会由衷产生。从40mm至105mm这6支N系列镜头,除了具有常见的光圈照明显示窗外,还有一个尼康放大镜头特有的光圈窗方向调节功能。放大者都知道,当您把放大镜头装在镜头板上旋上放大机卡座上时,有时候会因卡口方向原因,无法将放大镜头光圈窗口对着您,操作起来会感不方便。而尼康放大镜头在上紧镜头板和放大机卡座后,整支镜头还可以稍大一点的、又不至于旋松镜头板的力向左右方向作一节一节地调整,让光圈窗正对着您的视线,这样,操作起来就会很方便。
  另外,135mm和150mmA这两支系列镜头,为了操作者的使用方便,在镜头上还具备了两种镜头板卡口螺纹,即39×1和50×0.75mm两种尺寸,这是通过在50×0.75mm螺纹上套上赠送的一个39×1mm螺纹口的套圈来得到的。因为有的放大机会没有50×0.75mm的专业镜头卡板,如幸福450。这给使用者的确带来了很大的方便,这样的结构我们在施耐德的多支镜头上也可以看到。
40mm/F4N
  这支对于24×36mm底片而言的放大镜头视角为52°,基准清晰像场直径为43mm,6片4组对称高斯结构,体积为51mm×42mm,重100克,最大光圈为F4,最小为F22,一级定位。尼康公司称最佳放大倍率为10倍,常用倍率为5至30倍,也就是说,最大尺寸为40英寸。
  通过用测光表测量,收小两级光圈到F8时,中心和边缘的亮度差为50%,与罗敦司德、施耐德的40mm镜头一致,但是通过实放分辨率检测片时,最大口径的边缘分辨率要低于施耐德APO40mm/F2.8大口径镜头,缩小一级光圈后,边缘视场的分辨率和反差上升很多,缩小两挡光圈后,中心和边缘分辨率和APO几乎一致,难以看到差别,只不过尼康镜头是在F8时而施耐德镜头却在F5.6。过暗的投影给对焦和放大都带来了困难,因为目前台式中型放大机的最大功率的放大灯泡也只有250 W。过长的曝光时间也会影响照片品质,所以建议一些厂家停产40mm/F4放大镜头。施耐德40mm/F2.8APOHM镜头的问世,不仅给暗房师带来了方便,而且从这支镜头的优异的光学品质来看,40mm的大口径放大镜头的研制生产已经不再是难题了。
50mm/F2.8N
  当您第一次看到尼康的这支放大镜头时,会被它与众不同的外型设计所吸引,前镜片的直径达到30mm,重105克。加上优异的镀膜工艺,体现出的职业味道相当浓。6片4组对称高斯结构,最佳倍率在8倍时,最大倍率为20倍,体积为51mm×39mm。
  由于视场角只有41°,渐晕指数明显降低,只有30%左右,某些镜头会降低至28%,这对放大大尺寸照片非常有利。
  边缘清晰度在全开光圈时就非常好,缩小光圈至F5.6,整个视场的清晰度和亮度的一致性非常好,因此,在放大大尺寸照片时没有必要把光圈缩到F8,以争取尽可能的短曝光时间,避免光漫射对成品照片质量的影响。尼康公司把最佳放大倍率定在20倍,但是经过照片实放,有的照片即使在50倍时,照片仍然有相当好的影调力度水平,没有发灰沉闷的现象,那么,是否尼康公司太保守了呢?笔者就是这样认为的。
  由于尼康独自研磨的镜片高透明度的特性的支持,当把照片放大到40倍时,虽然呈现出的影像质量仍然相当好,但这是不完善的,某些光学指标却没有达到高倍要求。如,笔者在测试中发现一支镜头的弧矢和子午方向清晰度的统一性就不好,虽然弧矢线条有相当高的分辨率,子午方向的线条的清晰度就达不到要求,因此,特别高的倍率仍然需子午和弧矢的反差曲线吻合性很好的超倍专用镜头来放大,以求完美。
  但是,笔者在使用中发现,尼康这支放大镜头将图像尺寸放大到25倍时,光学质量仍然是非常优异的,完全可以接受苛刻的检查,不过尽管如此,我仍然希望尼康公司能凭借实力,研制一支尽可能完美的最高级50mm/F2.8放大镜头来,以和世界级摄影镜头的光学水准相匹配。
63mm/F2.8N
  这支镜头的视场角为43°,这是对于32×45mm规格的画幅而言的,基准清晰像场为55mm,最佳放大倍率为8倍,常用倍率为2至20倍,体积和重量是N系列中最大最重的,为51×42.5mm,重120克。
  不知为什么,尼康公司设计生产出这样一支规格的放大镜头。用来放大35mm底片,焦距显得长了一些,而对角线为55mm的像场直径有效画幅的规格为32×45mm,这是为什么?至少今天这样的底片规格是不存在的。笔者在几年前由于贪图这支镜头F2.8的大光圈,在没有任何技术资料的情况下,曾经询问过北京一家著名的相机店,是否能够像罗敦司德的WA60mm镜头一样,能放大6×6或6×4.5底片?回答是可以。但是买回来一用,不仅6×6底片不能用,连6×4.5都不能用,基准清晰像场只有55mm,一点多余也没有。
  有一种说法,放大镜头的焦距一定要大于或等于底片的对角线距离,才能保证放大镜头对底片的涵盖能力,其实不为尽然。这种说法今天看来已显落后,因为焦长和对角线距离虽然都以mm为计,但不一定就有一定的关联,视场角完全可以按照光学专家的要求来设计,在一定的范围内可大可小。如,135mm镜头直径清晰像场可以做到160mm,60mm的广角放大镜头则可以设计到80mm,50mm镜头则又可以设计到43.2mm,光学专家也有能力把63mm焦距的放大镜头的视场角加大到可以放大6×6和6×4.5底片的幅度。可是这支尼康镜头的清晰像场直径与6×4.5底片的对角线直径竟有约14mm之差,当然不能配放6×4.5底片了。
  镜头做工精美、牢固,镀膜工艺优异,就在清晰像场内而言,清晰度非常好,渐晕也控制在30%左右,如果放大35mm底片时,只有25%。今天看来,这支镜头的43°视角所对应的32×45mm视场的设计意义不大,适用性差。落后的设计必然遭到市场淘汰。而60mm焦距段中,精良的施耐德APO60mm/F4.5HM这支专为6×4.5底片配套的低色散镜头已经问世,使得6×6和6×4.5相机配套的放大镜头的光学素质又大大前进了一步。不过,我们大家还是希望在不久的时候出现一支焦距为60至75mm之间的F2.8、直径清晰像场在80mm的大口径顶级放大镜头来。
75mm/F4N
  这支镜头是供6×6底片配套使用的,清晰像场直径为80mm,视场角为48°。4片3组天塞型结构,镀膜工艺一般,重仅90克,体积为51×38.5mm,是N系列镜头中最轻、最小的一支。
  经测试,这支镜头在缩小两级光圈后的渐晕指数为50%,没有出现超差的现象,分辨率在中心和边缘视场的统一性方面,令人遗憾,这是EL-NIKKOR群中,光学性能唯一最差的一支。不明白,6×6画幅的相机中,已经有了哈苏、禄莱、玛米亚、勃浪尼卡多种品牌,尼康为何如此不重视?就实力而言,要设计一支高水准的与顶级6×6相机配套的放大镜头在能力上是绰绰有余的。无论如何,这支镜头的光学素质无法与名牌120相机的摄影镜头的光学素质匹配。
80mm/F5.6N
  和许多厂家一样,80mm的放大镜头的清晰像场都已经扩展到了95mm左右,以致成为6×7底片的配套放大镜头。由于是F5.6的小光圈结构,镜头的重量和体积与50mm镜头基本一致,6片4组对称高斯结构,最大放大倍率为15倍,最佳放大倍率是5倍。
  由于视场角已经达到了53°,尽管采用F5.6的小光圈设计,收小两挡光圈至F11后,渐晕指数仍在50%左右。原先我以为这支镜头与罗敦司德80mm/F4镜头相比,可能尼康镜头的视场亮度均匀性会更好一些,但现在看来,缩小两级光圈后并没有很大改善,相反,对焦时视场更暗了。
  在清晰度方面,尼康这支镜头是很出众的,中心和边缘的分辨率一致性很好,影调力度和清晰度的平衡性也无可挑剔,50英寸左右的大照片成品质量仍然相当好,和许多厂家的80mm镜头一样,成为影楼制作照片的主力军之一。
  不过,这支镜头在市场上的竞争力很弱,因为以2500多元的售价购买F5.6光圈的镜头,倒不如以同样的价钱去购买一支大一级光圈的罗敦司德80mm/F4,损失了宝贵的一级通光量是非常可惜的。
105mm/F5.6N
  6×9片幅所配套的放大镜头一直是放大机镜头生产厂家开发研究的重点。罗敦司德、施耐德都有超低色散的APO系列和超倍的G系列这些光学素质超群的顶级镜头供选用。这是因为6×9片幅属于在照相机机种使用的两栖片种,如,有6×9的旁轴取景的技术相机,也广泛用于4×5技术相机上,这些摄影师大多数拍摄一些要求严谨的风光、建筑和广告照片,因此,厂家当然不愿意放弃在专业领域的份额的。
  尼康这支6片4组对称高斯结构的镜头视场角为51°,F11时渐晕指数为50%,基准清晰像场直径为120mm。涵盖84mm的6×9底片绰绰有余。
  在放大率为6倍时,鉴别率检测片的清晰度相当高,F11时整个视场的清晰度的均匀性很好,15倍以内放大质量无可挑剔,和许多专业EL-NIKKOR一样,几乎看不到色差的影响,场曲也非常小。相反,我们至今可以看到有些日本产120中片幅照相机的广角镜头都不同程度地存在垂轴色差和分辨率的不足,在一些老款镜头上尤其严重。
  关于影调力度和暗部层次也许不少人又要担心起来了,尼康放大镜头是否也是硬梆梆的,暗部墨黑一团,反差大得没有层次?笔者曾经不止一次重申,各种品牌的摄影放大镜头的影调力度的表现是非常微妙的,差别不可能大得让一般的使用者看得如此泾渭分明。影响影调力度和暗部层次的表现最为重要的是来自于摄影光比和冲洗、材料方面的因素,只要稍之增加或减少一点曝光和显影时间,这种轻微的差别就会完全破坏掉。使用尼康和德国镜头都有可能拍出硬梆梆和灰暗的图像来,权威的测试报告从来就不会对哪一个生产厂家的光学产品作没有客观依据的主观评论,或者轻易褒贬某一品牌的光学产品。在这一方面,光学专家都是极其严谨、负责的。而在我国,敢下定论的“专家”实在太多。当然,德国的光学产品的确是世界一流水准,这一点是有目共睹的。但是,笔者一直认为,日本的名牌光学产品与它差距非常微小,这种差别对使用者来说,难以看出。相反,大家都不要忘了,大多数的拍摄机会对于摄影者来说,因许多原因都无法达到镜头固有的最好光学水准,再去追求那一点点分辨率差别实在没有意义,只有认认真真地用好你手中的镜头才是最为重要的。
135mm/F5.6A
  目前还不清楚尼康公司为什么从135mm焦距开始,将4×5英寸以上底片规格的放大镜头定为A系列的含义,是不是指APO技术?不过我们看到这几支昂贵的镜头镀膜工艺都相当优异,几乎倾注了尼康NIC技术的最高水准,如180mm/F5.6是笔者第一次看到反射几乎无的放大镜头。读者都知道,如果将您的放大机镜头装在放大机上,升高后由下往上看,镀膜工艺没有达到十分好的镜头就能看到底片影像在镜组玻璃上的反射,而180mm/F5.6这支镜头就几乎看不到一点图像反射!这是世界顶级水平的镀膜工艺的展示。除此之外,从135mm焦距起,镜头的体积和重量猛然增加很多,同规格焦距的镜头都要比别的厂家大得多,所有技术符号、标志全部是模压铸刻,而不是N系列那样印刷上去的字体,镜身材料全部采用金属,看不到一点塑料零件,镜头做工相当细腻且坚固,笔者经常看到一些二手器材店里伤痕累累的EL-NIKKOR镜头,光学素质仍然没有一点改变,这主要归功于它那铁打的“筋骨”,并且,从180mm/F5.6开始至360mm/F5.6的5支镜头中都是超大基准清晰像场的宽视场设计,如300mm/F5.6基准清晰像场已达410mm,足够容纳10×12英寸底片的放大和制版,而放大8×10英寸的底片只需240mm的焦距就足够了。
  135mm这支镜头是为4×5配套的,视场角为53°。基准清晰像场为160mm,刚刚达到4×5英寸对角线直径,前置滤镜为52×0.75mm。有39×1mm和50×0.75mm两种螺口供不同的镜头板选用,重量为190克,体积为47.5×56mm。
  135mm这支镜头镀膜工艺要稍逊于150mm/F5.6镜头,但是视场亮度均衡性仍然很好,对于4×5底片达到了中心和边缘的50%光比(F11时)。众所周知,4×5技术相机不少的配套摄影镜头,中心至边缘视场的光衰落都比较大,尤其是广角和超广角镜头,以致厂家都会提供一枚由边缘向中心的渐灰镜来抵消视场亮度的不平衡。那么,以135mm/F5.6这支镜头50%的渐晕指数是一个相当适宜的指数,其实读者应该知道,放大机镜头生产厂家在50°至54°的视场角放大镜头都会把渐晕指数控制50%左右,而视场角41°左右的放大镜头都会把渐晕指数控制在30%,这是一个光学规律问题。
  就分辨率而言,最大口径时边缘视场出现了轻度柔和,清晰度有所下降,F11时,整个视场清晰度非常好,由于玻璃透明度高,还原的影像没有一点混沌之感,鲜明高饱和色彩和有力的影调力度体现出了一支专业放大镜头高水平的光学品质境界。尼康公司把这支镜头的最佳倍率定在5倍,最大倍率在10时,笔者将底片放大12.5倍,图像反差仍然没有一点受损,线条仍相当清晰。
150mm/F5.6A
  在我国市场上,尼康这支镜头不便宜,6000多元的售价已经接近罗敦司德同规格超倍的G镜头价格,不过当您拿起这支重达210克的镜头时,就会看到尼康技艺的精华所在:前镜片直径宽达38.5mm,镜长为50.2mm,直径50mm,优异的镀膜工艺无论对着强光,还是平淡的光线,几乎看不到一点反射,镜组玻璃已经非常接近透明无色的程度,专业品味非常高。
  由于视场角已在51°,因此与53°的135mm镜头相比,渐晕指数几乎没有改变,都控制在50%,但是基准清晰像场却延长到了180mm,这对改善边缘视场的清晰度有利。
  全孔径时,视场清晰度基本上和135mm镜头一致,边缘视场的清晰度很微弱地比135mm镜头好一些,收缩两级光圈至F11时,这两支镜头的表现力基本一样,都十分清晰锐利。
  高水准的镀膜工艺给我们的放大带来什么样的好处呢?严格地说,这是许多读者包括本人还不十分清楚的问题。为此,以单层镀膜的RODAGON105mm/F5.6和中等镀膜水平的尼康135mm/F5.6A以及这支镜头作一个有实际意义的对比放大检测,看看顶级镀膜工艺给我们改善了什么。取一张色彩和细节丰富的35mm人像底片,把三支放大镜头的工作光圈都定在F11,标准曝光时间为4.3秒,照片尺寸为8英寸,放大倍率约5.6倍,由于三支镜头的焦距不同,在立柱上的高度会不一样,但是统一的光圈 值和倍率给予画幅的光照度应是一致的。
  笔者发现,如果以4.3秒的曝光对于中等水准镀膜工艺的135mm镜头是合适的时候,单层镀膜的105mm罗敦司德镜头就不足够,约欠曝10%,而尼康的150mm镜头则过曝10%,这样,镀膜工艺优异的镜头和单层镀膜镜头之间约差了20%的曝光量,这种差异在摄影上对彩色负片是微不足道的。但是在放大中则影响较大,过曝和欠曝20%的照片就是废品,而增加的20%的曝光量则又是非常宝贵的。
  原来以为单层镀膜镜头的色彩再现会不如多层镀膜的镜头,经过测试,发现这方面的差别非常微小,当把105mm的镜头放大时欠曝量追平到150mm镜头的曝光量时,之间几乎不存在色彩差别,实际应用上是不存在影响的,为此,我们可以在玛米亚7的中焦150mm/F4.5摄影镜头上,看到似是极其简单的镀膜现象,结果拍出来的照片色彩却异常饱和并且有相当高的清晰度。
  以此看来,优异的多层镀膜工艺带来了最小的光量损失和最佳的色彩平衡,而清晰度的改善,笔者认为最为根本的、影响最大的是光学玻璃本身的品质,高清晰度的单层镀膜105mm的罗敦司德和玛米亚7配套中焦150mm/F4.5就是例子。当然,也不是所有的单层镀膜镜头都是好镜头。