Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] OM Pin-hole photography problem - help!

Subject: Re: [OM] OM Pin-hole photography problem - help!
From: "Lama-Jim L'Hommedieu" <lamadoo@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:37:05 -0500
Is the question "Why did the OM-4 quench the shutter at 14S every time, 
regardless of the amount of light?"

I validated Walt's figure, 1 sec. @ f/180 for sunlight exposure.  The e-SIF 
says the lower limit of Curt's 4ti is "approx. -5EV~19EV
at ISO/ASA 100, 50mm F1.4, normal temperature and humidity".  I think John Lind 
said that if the lower limit is -5EV at f/1.4, then
the linkages involved mean you "lose" one EV value for every smaller f-stop.  
For example, if memory serves, at f/2.0, the lower
limit is -4.  If you take it all the way out to f/180, like I did, you get the 
lower limit is +9EV at f/180.  After Walt (and
Shipman), sunlight is about EV15.  So, going by the numbers, the 4Ti could 
meter EV15, even at f/180 because, theoretically, the
lower limit would be 6 stops less light (+9 EV).

Practically speaking, the 4Ti wasn't designed for pinhole exposures, of course. 
 So, Curt, if you're pretty sure about that f/180
number, I'd try Walt's figure of 1 second, then try one with 1 stop more 
exposure, using B and counting to
"two-one-hundred-thousand" out loud.  You could bracket +2 stops by counting to 
4 or course but I don't think reciprocity runs more
than 1 stop usually with an exposure on the order of one second.

Long story, short:  14S sounds like gross overexposure, assuming the pinhole is 
close to the film plane.  Gees, I guess a body cap
acts like about an inch of extension.  Who wants to run with that calculation?

Interesting thread.

Lama


< 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 >




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz