With the proviso that I haven't tried it yet, I think a 55mm-49mm step down
ring with an empty 49mm filter would do the job, and would then point the
way to use lenses with filters other than 55mm. Why, with a 62-49 ring you
could even use the legendary 35-80! Although in that instance "Why?" might
be more than appropriate.
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 20 May 2013 03:57
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] Oly 4/3 vs m4/3 lens mounts and adapters
But it's also useful on the bellows when using a lens with 55mm filter to
attach the bellows or slide copier shade to the lens... if you could find
one. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/19/2013 9:58 AM, Mark Dapoz wrote:
>
> I see what you mean now. Yes, I have the actual product and all of the
original documentation that came with it. I think this confusion comes down
to a "translation" error. The original Japanese instruction sheet correctly
depicts the adapter without any threads while the English translated one
shows some threads. Here's a comparison of the two documents:
>
> http://olympus.dementix.org/misc/copy_stand_adapters.jpg
>
> This 55 -> 49 adapter is really only useful for the copy stand.
>
> -mark
>
>
> On 13-May-19, at 7:32 AM, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
>> That's a great find but we're apparently coming at our views from
>> different sources. If I read you correctly you're looking at the
>> *actual product* and stating that the outside of the 49mm end is not
>> threaded and the inside has ridges. What I've been looking at is the
>> handy_copy_stand.pdf. That's a copy of the user's manual in PDF form
>> that was included in the eSIF as distributed on CD. That clearly
>> shows the 55/49mm adapter to have threads on the outside of the 49mm
>> end as would a 49mm filter. The interior ridges are not illustrated.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> On 5/18/2013 9:29 PM, Mark Dapoz wrote:
>>>
>>> I had to dig out my sample of the copy stand to figure out exactly
>>> what is going on. The 43 -> 49 and 22.5,43.5 -> 49 adapters do
>>> indeed have threads only on the smaller side, the 49mm copy stand
>>> side is completely smooth. The 55 -> 49 adapter on the other hand
>>> appears to have threads on both sides of the adapter, but on closer
>>> inspection the 49mm side "threads" aren't really threads. The
>>> inside of the adapter has ridges which makes it appear to have
>>> threads but they aren't. I suppose Olympus did this to cut down on
>>> any light reflection since the adapter is going into a larger lens
>>> opening. So the illustration in the SIF is correct, only the
>>> assumption that they're threads is incorrect.
>>>
>>> -mark
>>>
>>> On 13-May-18, at 7:45 PM, Chuck Norcutt
>>> <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't know what you refer to as the "SIF" other than source
>>>> documents for the eSIF that I don't have. But the eSIF does
>>>> reference the user's manual for the Handy Copy Stand which does
>>>> show the 3 adapters available for it. One of those is the 49/55
>>>> and, as you stated, the drawing shows the 49mm side as threaded
>>>> whereas the other two adapters are not threaded on both sides. I
>>>> agree. It must be an error.
>>>>
>>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>>
>>>> On 5/18/2013 4:00 PM, piers@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>>> The 55-49 adapter appears in the SIF (not eSIF, where it is said
>>>>> to be optional) as part of the Handy Copy Stand set, for just the
>>>>> same application, and the illustration is consistent with your
>>>>> description, except it has a thread on the 49mm end. I think
>>>>> that's an error, as the smaller adaptors don't have a thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> Piers
>>>>>
>>>>> On 18/05/2013, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> The next question is whether the 49/55 adapter was originally
>>>>>> supplied with the bellows. Does anyone actually have one of
>>>>>> these and does it look as I described that I think it must look?
>>>>>> Searching the eSIF (briefly) did not reveal such a part to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've got to think about how to replicate a part like that for
>>>>>> reversing my 90/2.5 Viv S1 macro which a 58mm filter. If there's
>>>>>> a 49 to 55mm filter adapter that would work. You'd need the ring
>>>>>> from the 49mm filter to make a 51mm diameter attachment point for
>>>>>> the bellows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/18/2013 3:03 AM, piers@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>>>>> Splendid stuff, Chuck, it all does now make sense in a way that
>>>>>>> eSIF and SIF (which I also reviewed) don't even approach. It was
>>>>>>> late, I didn't follow my own advice to just try it!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Piers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18/05/2013, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> You're inferring stuff rather than actually measuring the
>>>>>>>> bellows. I have done my due diligence and discovered that the
>>>>>>>> eSIF is perfectly correct. The reason that a Series VI is used
>>>>>>>> is that hole is supposed to take a filter... a Series VI size
>>>>>>>> filter... which Wiki tells me thus: Series
>>>>>>>> number Filter size Adapter ring VI 41.3 mm
44 mm My
>>>>>>>> handy dandy millimeter rule tells me that the thread on the
>>>>>>>> back of the lens board is (whaddya know) 44mm. I discovered
>>>>>>>> that very quickly since no 49mm filter would fit there. That
>>>>>>>> threaded hole is specifically for a filter and not for
>>>>>>>> reversing lenses.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once again, the bellows manual tells you nothing about that
>>>>>>>> filter provision. Your confusion about reversing lenses I
>>>>>>>> think comes about from assuming that it's done the way you
>>>>>>>> would on a camera body by attaching two lenses together joined
>>>>>>>> by a male threaded ring with threads on each side to match the
>>>>>>>> lenses to be joined. You've assumed that the
>>>>>>>> 49/55 adapter is one of those rings... but it is not. It has a
>>>>>>>> totally different function and isn't really 49mm on one end.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once you turn the front lens board around you don't need any
>>>>>>>> sort of threaded adapter since the OM lens mount on the lens
>>>>>>>> board is now facing the camera. Just install the lens on the
>>>>>>>> normal lens mount and it, like the lens board, is now reversed.
>>>>>>>> Where the 49/55 adapter comes in has to do with attaching the
>>>>>>>> bellows itself to the lens. The attaching ring normally
>>>>>>>> attaches to a ring on the back of the lens board that is about
>>>>>>>> 51mm diameter... or the outside diameter of a lens having a
>>>>>>>> 49mm filter. When you reverse a lens having a 49mm filter the
>>>>>>>> bellows attaching ring fits over the lens in the same way as it
>>>>>>>> does the ring on the back of the lens board. But when you use
>>>>>>>> a lens with 55mm filter the lens is too large. It needs a
>>>>>>>> step-down ring. Now, since I have never seen one of these
>>>>>>>> step-down rings I can only conclude that it has a 55mm thread
>>>>>>>> on one end and a 51mm unthreaded ring on the other such that it
>>>>>>>> presents the same diameter to the bellows attaching ring as the
>>>>>>>> ring on the back side of the lens board.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Or something like that. If you know something else correct me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/17/2013 6:23 PM, Piers Hemy wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Without looking at the Bellows manual I would opine that it
>>>>>>>>> would be surprising to find that Olympus did not use the
>>>>>>>>> 49/55mm thread there, as it is intended for reversing OM
>>>>>>>>> lenses on the (reversed) front standard. Why would they use a
>>>>>>>>> thread incompatible with all and any of their own lenses? And
>>>>>>>>> in place of reading a secondary source (useful as the eSIF
>>>>>>>>> is), why not try it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So I did look at the 12/81 edition of the Auto Bellows manual,
>>>>>>>>> and guess what?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was wrong.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And so is the eSIF, only more wronger (!)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's a 49mm thread, as "The adapter ring 55-49mm is needed to
>>>>>>>>> reverse the Macro 55mm F1.2 on the bellows" (p 14). Granted,
>>>>>>>>> they described the 55/1.2 as a Macro lens, which it isn't, but
>>>>>>>>> it does have a 55mm filter thread, from which I conclude the
>>>>>>>>> bellows has only a 49mm thread.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Piers
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Norcutt
>>>>>>>>> [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: 17 May 2013
>>>>>>>>> 22:26 To: Olympus Camera Discussion Subject: Re: [OM] Oly
>>>>>>>>> 4/3 vs m4/3 lens mounts and adapters
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I tried the focusing stage since Wayne said he'd gotten such
>>>>>>>>> an arrangement to work with his Pen and, if it worked, would
>>>>>>>>> require nothing more than what I already have.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I didn't come up with your solution since I've never
>>>>>>>>> completely read the bellows description in the eSIF which is,
>>>>>>>>> I think, the only place that tells you that the back of the
>>>>>>>>> lens board is threaded. But it looks like you need to re-read
>>>>>>>>> it yourself :-) since the thread is for a Series VI filter and
>>>>>>>>> is not a 49/55 filter thread.
>>>>>>>>> Nevertheless, your solution should work given the right bits
>>>>>>>>> and pieces.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But re-reading the eSIF to understand what you had written
>>>>>>>>> caused me to think about reversing the lens which might
>>>>>>>>> provide a bit more room to maneuver since it moves the thick
>>>>>>>>> base of the lens board to the back side. Maybe.
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the memory jog.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/17/2013 5:35 AM, Piers Hemy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I may have missed something obvious, but why are you using
>>>>>>>>>> the focusing stage? Remove the rear standard (camera mounting
>>>>>>>>>> board) and bellows from the bellows rail, and use the 49/55mm
>>>>>>>>>> filter threads on the back of the front standard (lens board)
>>>>>>>>>> to mount the OM-D.
>>>>>>>>>> You'll need a 55mm m4/3 reverse adaptor such as
>>>>>>>>>> 271191801433 on the auction site, and a female-female filter
>>>>>>>>>> adaptor such as this:
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.camera-filters.com/index.php?main_page=product_inf
>>>>>>>>>> o&cPath=4
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>> 31&pro
>>>>>>>>>> ducts_id=7214
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You may also need a blank filter ring to get extra
>>>>>>>>>> separation, but I'm sure you'll work that out!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Piers
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Norcutt
>>>>>>>>>> [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: 16 May
>>>>>>>>>> 2013 18:04 To: Olympus Camera Discussion Subject: Re:
>>>>>>>>>> [OM] Oly 4/3 vs m4/3 lens mounts and adapters
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm removing the grain of salt. I mounted the E-M5 on the
>>>>>>>>>> focusing stage, installed the OM adapter and some OM
>>>>>>>>>> extension tubes and then put the OM body mount from the
>>>>>>>>>> bellows onto the end of the tubes. Running the body mount
>>>>>>>>>> into the bellows connector resulted in the E-M5 setting in a
>>>>>>>>>> non-level position on the focusing stage.
>>>>>>>>>> I think my guess of 3mm (maybe 2mm) vertical misalignment may
>>>>>>>>>> be about right but it's not the height of the body or lens
>>>>>>>>>> center lines.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I had assumed that the OM body was lower and would align
>>>>>>>>>> properly. Nope, the two camera's lens centers appear to be at
>>>>>>>>>> the same height so an OM-1 on the focusing stage doesn't
>>>>>>>>>> align either. The problem of vertical misalignment is caused
>>>>>>>>>> by the height of the focusing stage.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/15/2013 11:15 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> A quick and very rough measurement looks like the vertical
>>>>>>>>>>> centerline of the E-M5 is about 3mm higher than an OM body.
>>>>>>>>>>> But take that with a grain of salt.
>>>>>>>>>>> Also, like the E-P1 the tripod thread is off center from the
>>>>>>>>>>> lens center by about 9mm. That, however, could likely be
>>>>>>>>>>> solved by drilling and tapping a new hole in the focusing
>>>>>>>>>>> stage. I'll take a better measurement later since this has
>>>>>>>>>>> some promise.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/15/2013 8:17 AM, Wayne Harridge wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> G'day Chuck,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Something like this should work:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.structuregraphs.com/RandomStuff/15-May-20
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> --
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>>>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.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/
>>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.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/
|
