Interesting. I must say, though it is a nice and solid bellows, it is
built
to a different standard to the other olympus equipment I have used.
For example,
all other equipment usually have engraved / stamped markings, whereas
the bellows
does not. And it's odd that, as part of this system in which
everything fits
so well together, they would have designed a bellows which is just a
couple of mm
too short to accommodate a body with a winder attached to it, one of
the few places
one would always wish to use it.
Oh well, for those cases I just use the auto-tube, but the bellows has
a much greater
extensions range (especially on the short end - the 20/3.5 with
minimum bellows extension
has significantly less image magnification than on the tube's min.
extension).
Also, a couple of times, I have used the auto-tube together with the
bellows for massive
extension - outside the specs of the 20/3.5 macro, but I am happy with
the images it seems
to produce when pushed like that. It's a microscope, really.
Back to the bellows: Mounting upside-down is not really an option for
me because of flash,
but are you guys saying that a Motor Drive 1 would fit? (whereas the
winder does not?)
On 28 Aug 2009, at 3:18 PM, Frank van Lindert wrote:
> As far as I know the bellows was not designed by Olympus. The same
> bellows, but with other mounts, has been used for other camera brands
> as well. I don't remember precisely which brands. Mamiya is the first
> which comes to mind... and Pentax perhaps?
>
> Frank van Lindert
> Utrecht NL.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|