On 15 Nov 98, at 21:03, Jan Steinman wrote:
> >From: "John Petrush" <petrush@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ...
> >IMHO, you will get better results with a normal lens with a reversing ring
> >and extension than with a normal lens and close-up lens attachments.
> >...With the reversing ring, all body-to-lens automation is lost,
> >leaving you with effectively a preset lens arrangement...
>
> And how do you accomplish that? I used one of those springy metal pants
> cuffs protector for cyclists to hold in the depth-of-field button, but it
> sure would have been nice if there was some other way.
>
> Another trade-off of this approach is exposing that sensitive rear element
> to the elements. A scuff on the back is worth three or four on the front,
> in terms of image quality!
>
> Still, it is inexpensive. I shot macro that way for years until I could
> afford a real macro lens.
>
A manual 7or 14mm tube will solve both of these problems: it will keep the
lens stopped down, and provide some protection. I haven't actually tried this,
but have seen it in a magazine showing an OM-1 with 50/1.8 setup this way.
Shawn & Janis Wright
swright@xxxxxxxxx
http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/~swright
(Olympus List Archives)
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|