Kelton wrote:
>
> I've been pondering the lens mounts on my OMs and Zuikos
> recently. I've
> noticed that a glance at the lens mount surface can quickly
> tell you the
> amount of use a camera or lens may have seen. Is there such a
> thing as
> lens mount maintenance? Is there a way to best mount lenses? Is it
> helpful to twist on the lenses slowly or possibly use some
> kind of light
> lubricant on the lens mount surface? I'm guessing 'no', but my
> auto-mechanics background keeps telling me that you don't rub steel
> against steel without a lubricant. Finally, on this subject,
> what's the
> longest lens you'd want to mount on an OM body which is attached to a
> tripod? I'm guessing that the tripod mount on the bottom of
> the 300mm is
> Olympus' way of telling us not to mount a Zuiko longer than a
> 200mm lens,
> if the body itself is screwed to the tripod (of course, I
> realize this
> all depends on the amount of glass in the lens; I can imagine
> a 100mm f/1
> lens requiring a tripod mount on the lens!). But my guess is
> that it's
> easy to damage the lensmount by hanging an overly-large lens on a
> tripod-mounted body, creating in effect a permanent "shift
> body" with the
> mount angled forever downward (a boon for you macro buffs).
> What wisdom
> do you have to share on the topic of lens mount hygiene?
I think you are more likely to damage the tripod socket on the body than the
lens mount (based on the relative diameters of the two), when you attach a
long (heavy) lens.
Wayne Harridge
Ivanhoe, Victoria, Australia
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Louvre/6152/
< 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 >
|