Talk:Exit pupil

message: Formatted the article and added a small section on relative brightness. This article may need a picture showing the lens on a camera... I would add one except I need my camera to photograph the lens and the lens is firmly attached to the camera... I tried a mirror but I'm just not steady enough. Also an equation relating the f-number to the focal length and the objective lens to the magnification would be a good addition except I'm not sure of the standard symbols for each. -- Bob-505 00:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took out the bit on relative brightness, as it was manifestly untrue for camera lenses, and was covered sort of already in the section on direct-observation instruments.  I'm not sure what you have in mind with camera lenses; the exit pupil size and position are not functions of focal length and f-number, but more complicated. Dicklyon 07:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Small update

message: I propose that Ramsden disc be merged with this article. There is no reason for an archaic term for a thing to have an article of its own, separate from the article on the thing itself. This is especially true for technical topics.--Srleffler (talk) 01:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there was no objection, I went ahead with the merge. I think this article is much improved—there was some good material in the Ramsden disc article.--Srleffler (talk) 04:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I have read the phrase "Image sensors often have a limited range of angles over which they will efficiently accept light" in this and several other Wikipedia entries but have never been able to find a scientific paper (or image sensor data sheet) that supports it. This needs to be supported by a proper reference or references. GromitRoberts (talk) 20:26, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This book has some good stuff on it. Here is another.  Dicklyon (talk) 20:52, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Exit pupil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006011424/http://www3.nd.edu:80/~kwb/OrtizBowyerFlynnBTAS_2013.pdf to https://www3.nd.edu/~kwb/OrtizBowyerFlynnBTAS_2013.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:04, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article states that "If the disc is larger than the eye's pupil, light will be lost instead of entering the eye; if smaller, the view will be vignetted." The first part is true - if the exit pupil is bigger than the eye pupil, light will hit the iris and not enter the eye. But I don't believe the second part; if I use a x250 eyepiece on my 250mm aperture telescope and consequently the exit pupil diameter is a tiny 1.0mm, there is no vignetting: the full field of view is visible, with no shading effects. Am I using the wrong definition of "vignetting"?
Funast (talk) 12:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small exit pupil