On 7/26/2016 2:42 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
Moose writes:
<<Welcome back! How was Switzerland?
Excellent, though it was tough lugging too much stuff up an endless steep
trail in the sun from Grindelwald to Kleine Scheidegg.
I did have an OM kit with me at all times but underestimated the activation
energy to pull anything out of my pack with so many miles to go in a day.
So Edward Weston wasn't so wrong after all? :-) Consider what his kit weighed.
I think a few images may be of interest but little time yet to sort things out.
<<<But which 1 or less diopter lens? And how would it work in practice with the
PLeica? The 5T on 100-400 @ 400 is very, very good.
Perhaps it was the altitude induced hypoxia but clicked on a Pentax T132 achromatic
diopter (0.76) while had iffy wifi in a mountain hut---my phone just pinged with
the search and I thought why not for the modest BIN price. I wasn't even sure it
went through, but found out it did and paid for it later that night at the B&B
after rehydration and some fuel. It looks like it was never used and I still
haven't used it. How it will be behave on a PLecia 100-400 is totally unclear but
it is designed for long FL.
Weeelll, maybe. It was designed and sold for Pentax 67 lenses. FOV of 200 mm on 6x7 is about eq. to 95-100 mm on FF. I
supposed that FOV/film coverage of the prime lens would make a difference in the design of a two element C-U lens. That,
and the era in which it was made, made me think it might act more like a C-U lens designed for a FF lens of 100 mm or so.
As I have a similar era aC-U Minolta 0 specified on the instruction sheet for 100-135 mm FF lenses (not the 50-200 on
the web list), I was skeptical.
OTOH, given the quite different results I got with Canon 500D and Nikon 5T, targeted at apparently similar primary lens
FLs, I think there's no way to know without actual trial testing. So it could be useful to give it a whirl on your
lenses, or even the PLeica 100-400
The Minolta results is not encouraging.
It's getting to be long enough now that I may be letting my initial disappointment from very informal shots go, and try
it again. Just mounted it on a 58=>62 mm adapter . . .
Perhaps I should have waited for your 5T experiments. There is also a Pentax
achromatic T226 at 0.44 diopter, but may be less useful even if performs well
due to low power. It appears to be designed for 200mm FL.
As above, I'd guess that nobody knows how any of these aC-U lenses will perform with any particular primary lens outside
of the ones they were designed for.
As to usefulness, it all depends on the subject. I think I would like a weaker diopter than the 1.5 of the 5T for
flutterbys. Medium to smaller ones fall in to a kind of dead zone between lens alone and with 5T. For smaller things,
the 1.5 diopters of the 5T are good.
Optimal Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|