Subject: | RE: [OM] Long Focus vs. Mirror Lens |
---|---|
From: | "Daniel J. Mitchell" <DanielMitchell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Thu, 31 Jan 2002 14:09:31 -0700 |
> This is the case because these mirror lenses are solid catadioptric designs, > and there's no place 'inside' to put a regular diaphragm. Ah, that makes sense. Is the Zuiko 500mm mirror not solid, and thus lighter? 11oz isn't all _that_ lightweight, after all. (I'd look on esif, but..) -- dan < 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 > |
Previous by Date: | [OM] metering, Sue Pearce |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] 40/2 is a serious lens... was Don't need no stinking OM-2, Chris Barker |
Previous by Thread: | RE: [OM] Long Focus vs. Mirror Lens, Winsor Crosby |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] Long Focus vs. Mirror Lens, Jim Brokaw |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |