No, I didn't miss the keyword "reversed". I'm well aware of reversing
lenses for macro work and also quite familiar with John Shaw's book
"Closeups in Nature". I've owned my own well-used copy for probably 20
years. And I didn't *intentionally* run off to longer focal length
C-mount lenses. I specifically picked the 38mm versions of Elgeet
lenses since I misunderstood the following in Dean's post.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Gotta try focus stacking with that Elgeet sometime. Prices for the
38/2.8 have softened some in the last few years."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought he was referring to an Elgeet 38mm (which was reinforced by
finding faster Elgeet 38mm lenses plentiful) when in fact he was
referring back to the OM 38mm.
But you did answer my question on image circle size... it doesn't matter
for the size of many of the subjects that Dean photographs. I should
have understood that after having spent a day with him in the lab and
the field a couple of years ago.
Chuck Norcutt
On 8/25/2016 11:37 PM, Moose wrote:
On 8/25/2016 4:38 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
Then what's wrong with this Elgeet 38mm f/1.9 for $50?
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/ELGEET-LENS-38mm-f-19-ROCHESTER-NEW-YORK-/331933452486?hash=item4d48c688c6:g:b0cAAOSwH6lXQjtF>
or this 38mm f/1.8 for $25?
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/Elgeet-38mm-f1-8-Opto-Navitar-Telephoto-Lens-/252506961393?hash=item3aca9675f1:g:gc4AAOSwqfNXl6pi>
And regarding any of these C-mount lenses they're only designed for an
image circle for 16mm film. Even if they cover Super 16mm that's only
about 7.4 x 12.5mm whereas 35mm is 24 x 36mm and even 4/3 is 17.3 x
13.5mm. That's only about 40% of even a 4/3 sensor.
Might you have missed the key word in the Elgeet 7/2.5 mention -
"reversed"? Reversed, its small, 8 mm film size coverage is fine for
tiny things. That it has good performance in the other direction at
short focal distances is likely more accident than design intent.
To run off from there to longer FL C-mount movie film lenses unreversed
seems more than a bit of a stretch to me. Reversed, one or another
might, or might not, be good. How is one to tell without testing?
I think the Oly macro lenses would be cheaper unless one gets off on
that sort of collecting and testing.
Coverage Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|