Better use small apertures for good depth of field to take up all this
"slop" in the tolerances. :-)
ps: The thin lens equation predicts 0.254mm extension between 10 and 5
meters so your measurement is pretty good.
Chuck Norcutt
C.H.Ling wrote:
> Sorry, Moose. 0.19mm (46.08-45.89) difference seems a lot! I remember Canyon
> New F1 claimed they controlled the tolerance to 0.02mm. I just made some
> measurements on an OM1n and OM2n, the four corners of the guide rails are no
> more than 0.035mm difference, this already included the errors from my not
> so flat table (but I did measured more than two times at different locations
> of my table).
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/TOL.jpg
>
> Another interesting figure, for the OM 50/1.4, focus from 10 meter to 5
> meter the lens extended around 0.25mm (this measurement may not be very
> accurate but should be within 0.03mm)
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Moose"
>
>> So for fun, I grabbed an OM-1 and a digital micrometer. The distance
>> from the front of the mount to the inner film rail varied slightly from
>> point to point, with a maximum of 46.08 mm and minimum of 45.89 mm. To
>> further emphasize the fact that such numbers aren't exact, The
>> micrometer spec is resolution and repeatability of .01 mm, but absolute
>> accuracy of .02 mm. The micrometer is quite new, so should be in spec.
>>
>> Adjusting the measurements for that, the range of register distances on
>> this one OM-1 may be as wide as 45.86 to 46.11 mm.
>>
>> My suggestion? Just use the nominal spec. of 46 mm and don't worry about
>> it.
>>
>> Moose
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
