Hey guys, if you mean to cross post something to the list could you please
make sure you use the olympus@ address and not owner-olympus@ address.
Giles
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
From: "Tom Trottier" <tom@xxxxxx>
Organization: ACT Productions Inc., 199-K1S 2P3, Ottawa
To: Richard Schaetzl <Richard.Schaetzl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 19:30:21 -0400
Subject: Re: [OM] 200/4
Reply-to: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You can hand hold the camera & lens *while* you take the picture on the
tripod to help damp the vibrations. This is probably especially
effective for exposures faster than 1/60th, since human vibrations are
pretty slow. Olympus recommends using your finger rather than a cable
release.
I'm surprised that no one is selling a tripod head which incorporates
dampers yet. I suppose that the more mass attached to the camera, the
better, tho. How about:
- a heavy flat plate between the head & camera? Or attached to the
camera if the lens is on the tripod?
- a carbon fibre (it damps) or lead alloy Quick Release (QR) plate?
- a big QR head with a slight concave shape that holds closely to the
entire base of the camera? especially for the Manfrotto/Bogen 200PL-14
3157N QUICK RELEASE PLATE RECTANGULAR 1/4 that I use!
Perhaps leaving any QR on while handholding is even better!
Oh, Richard, I see your are one of the "stud"s at un-hannover.
Tom
--- Original Message ---
Date sent: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 16:25:14 +0200
From: Richard Schaetzl <Richard.Schaetzl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Universitaet Hannover
> A little bit late, hopefully not to late.
> Doug Cooper wrote:
>
> > I'm wondering what the consensus is regarding this lens, or whether there
> > even is one. The tests seem all over the map. Some seem to think it's a
> > great lens, even hand-held;
>
> IMHO the 200mm/4.0 Zuiko is a good lens, it rendered pictures with good
> contrast, showing fine details.
>
> I personaly have problems handholding lenses longer than 135mm, it needs
> concentration
> and short exposure times not to ruin the photo.
> A solid fixture of lens and camera helps to achieve best results.
>
> > And what about the 2xA converter? Someone in the archives suggested you
> > could *hand-hold* it with the converter attached!
>
> I was that bold.
> No, I don't recomend it for best image quality, but with bright sunshine
> and short exposure times it's possible.
> The reason I did it was, I was so dissapointed with the results of this
> combo fixed to an tripod (... and I used an OM-4 with aperture/mirror
> prefire!). In fact the results handholding were better than the one from
> the tripod (might be a problem of the tripod head too).
It does sound like a shutter design problem, rather than
aperture/mirror!
Were the apertures the same? - Gary's tests show the 200/4 is better at
f/5.6 to 16 than at f/22-32
> The whole structure of an OM, 2x converter and 200mm Zuiko (very big
> lever, small contact with tripod head) is so instable, the very small
> vibrations induced by the shutter might ruin the photo.
> For best results, I suggest to use a bean bag with the 200mm/4.0. The
> bag will eliminate vibrations and support the lens barrel.
>
> > That would be
> > something: a 400mm lens that didn't require a tripod...
>
> Not this lens, a normal tripod is just worse than handholding. Such
> "wonder-teles" exist, at a price.
> Regards
> Richard
------------------
From:Tom Trottier, President, ACT Productions Inc.
tom@xxxxxx http://www.act.ca
+1 613 594-4829 fax +1 613 594-8944
199 Holmwood Ave, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 2P3
"Make it as simple as possible, but no simpler" - Einstein
< 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 >
< 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 >
|