Thanks Erwin, very useful - I just got an Auto Bellows so I'll try my 200
on that too. I was very impressed by a pic I saw some time ago of a
photographer standing in a swamp with something like a 300mm on a bellows
with monopod shooting frogs and lizards.
As to the live sex acts on the web, I think the butterflies are what in
England we used to call a Common Tortishell(sp?). Naughty little devils.
AndrewF
>Hi,
>
>Recentely I performed some tests with the Zuiko 200/4 as a macro lens.
>Although this lens is not designed as a macro lens, it is mentioned in the
>manual of th 65-116 tube as a "substitute method". With the 65-116 tube you
>can obtain a magnification of 0.67x. But the best news comes now: at 0.67x
>magnification the distance between the front element of the lens and the
>subject is about 56 cm!!! The distance between the camera and the subject is
>about 85 cm.
>The quality of the images is not bad. At F4 the corners are reasonably
>sharp, but the constrast is low. At F11, however, the images are fine.
>Unfortunately I am not able to scan images at the moment, but I will publish
>a comparison of pictures taken with the 200/4 and the 80/4 macro within a
>few weeks. As a compensation, here's a new macro picture on my site (taken
>with the 50/3.5):
>http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/photovoogt/central-america/vlinders.html
>If somebody can identify the species of butterflies, I would be very happy
>to know.
>Bye,
>Erwin Voogt
< 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 >
|