On 3/11/2017 3:07 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
Rather than a second tripod the RRS solution options are better. Draping a
shot filled bean bag over the lens may be the final ingredient required if
vibration/movement is the problem. Using EFCS would also be best.
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Quick-Release/Multi-Purpose-Rails-Packages/Long-Lens-Support-Packages
That sounds good, and the gear is nice looking, but it flies in the face of Gary's extensive practical experience with
the same lens. I quote again:
"The second test with "lens support" was probably a tripod head resting under
the front of the lens hood. It made no
difference."
I suspect that "It made no difference." means it didn't work. I can't see how a fancy rail, still dependent on a
freestanding tripod, is likely to do better.
More practical, in that it worked for him, advice based on experience:
"I use the same lens to this day. I shoot at 1/500th or faster
and drape an arm over the top of the lens and bear down into the tripod with
my weight. I get a very stable setup that way. I hide myself from the wind,
if there is any. Don't even try and use one when it is windy out unless you
can shelter yourself. The hands on the camera technique is worthless for
shutter speeds of about 1/250th sec. or slower."
The bean bag trick (even w/o changing out for shot)
Sand works pretty well. My theory is that effectiveness depends on the frequency, as well as amplitude, of the
vibration, and that it depends on other factors in addition to sheer weight. Sand is tiny, irregularly shaped pieces of
relatively light material. Lead shot is much larger, roughly spherical shaped pieces of heavy material. They are bound
to behave differently as damping material with different vibrations. Walt was the one I recall claiming that shot bags
were more effective, for the same weight, than sand - for this specific purpose of damping aperture shock in OMs.
really helps the Z. 50-250 sharpen up. It was an under-rated lens.
I think many mid to long teles were affected by aperture shock. I thought my Tokina 50-250 was pretty good. But then, I
shot either hand held, wetware damping, or with mirror/aperture prefire if on a tripod. That was an annoying pain, but
it worked, for those FLs.
All our speculation is based on experiences with OM bodies, whereas Jan's troubles are with a 4/3 body, heavier, and
without aperture shock.
My Celestron 750/6 seems off from previous resolution . They sell artificial
"stars" and the CAT lens can be aligned by the user, so it seems Not sure if
mine needs a service visit.
I wonder if it is worse than it was, or if your expectations have been raised.
:-)
This old article on LL about experience with the legendary 800/11 Viv solid CAT raises that question for all our older
long gear. <https://luminous-landscape.com/solid-cat/>
My guess is that what MR got with that gear and very careful technique could be equaled or bettered with the PLeica
100-400 on GX8, GX85, E-M5 II or E-M1 I or II - hand held.
Progress Is 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/
|