The Pentax 67 system include a helicoid extension tube that might be helpful
for that.
http://shorturl.net/?l=Lu
Matt
At 04:26 PM 5/8/2003 -0700, Moose wrote:
>According to Walt, the 135/4.5 has a large image circle that will cover 6x9cm.
>Waht he didn't test was the quality of the image outside of the 35mm frame,
>which may deteriorate as on goes farther out. It is a possible candidate for
>trying out, since the additional 65mm of minimum extention means there is room
>for an adapter between lens and body. However, the focusing helicoid only
>covers a short range for find focusing, so any adapter would need to provide
>rough focusing adjustment, like the 65-166 or bellows do on Oly bodies.
>
>Moose
>
>Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 16:33:43 -0500
>From: "Walt Wayman" <hiwayman@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [OM] Zuikos and 6x9 (Was Siren Song)
>
>It's a little sad that some of us, myself included, since Olympus has pulled
>the plug on the OM system now are casting about for other ways to use our
>lenses, whether with MF or digital. Anyway, I went back to the drawing board
>-- actually, the tripod-mounted 6x9 Century Graphic -- with some more lenses
>to see just how much they would cover. I didn't try every lens, but I think I
>covered a fairly representative sample, and here are the results.
>
>The 35/2.8 shift will cover 6x6, but would vignette at 6x7, and would really
>vignette at 6x9. Plus, even at 6x6, the shift would be pretty much useless
>because of the small image circle. One advantage, though, is you wouldn't
>have to use a Rube Goldberg device to stop it down.
>
>The only lens I found that actually covers a full 6x9 at infinity is the
>135/4.5 Macro, and it does the job corner to corner, which means it has an
>image circle of at least 11.5 cm. I was surprised, to say the least. Nothing
>else came close.
>
>Here's how some others fared (lens + approximate image circle):
>
>17/3.7 Tamron, 6 cm
>21/2 Zuiko, 5 cm
>28/2.8 Carl Zeiss Jena, 6 cm
>35/2 Zuiko, 5 cm
>50/1.4 Zuiko, 5 cm
>50/3.5 Zuiko Macro, 5 cm
>80/4 Zuiko Macro, 6 cm (nearly covers 6x7 at 6 in. or less from subject, so it
>could be used for macro work)
>100/2 Zuiko, 7 cm
>135/2.8 Zuiko, 7 cm
>180/2.8 Zuiko, 7 cm
>300/4.5 Zuiko, 6 cm
>
>I didn't try any of the longer lenses, such as the 400 or 500 Zuikos, or the
>Tamron 300/2.8 (too heavy to hold with one hand while fiddling with the
>camera). The only zoom I tried was the 35-80/2.8 Zuiko, and it produced a 6
>cm circle at all focal lengths.
>
>End of story.
>
>Walt
>
>
>
>Matt BenDaniel wrote:
>
>>BTW...I think there may be a few OM lenses that will work on MF cameras. For
>>example, the 135/4.5 needs about 65mm of extension (in addition to 46mm
>>flange back) to reach infinity focus. I'm not sure what the 135/4.5's image
>>circle is, but I'd guess you could use it on most MF cameras, if you found
>>some safe way to mount it. If the rearward protrusion of any lens interferes
>>with the reflex mirror, then you have to lock up the mirror to avoid damage.
>>Then how do you focus?
>
>
>
>< 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 >
--
Matt BenDaniel
matt@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://starmatt.com
< 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 >
|