Hi,
>> A wicked thought just occurred to me: has anybody ever tried
>> a reversing ring with the 35/2.8 shift?
>
> Maybe I miss the point,
My initial point was that it was just a wicked thought that occurred to me,
and I was wondering if anyone had seriously tried that, as this lens
provides for an easy way of stopping down the aperture.
>> ... stopping the aperture down is a piece of cake. :)
>
> Hmmm... expose the rear element of a $500+ lens to potential injury
> so you won't have trouble stopping down, or go out and get a 35/2.8
> for chicken-feed, and simply "JB Weld" the DOF button down? :-)
Well, if you read my previous message well you can deduce that I myself
didn't try this :)
In fact, a few months ago I was looking into "poor man's macro solutions"
and came across three options:
1-Close up lenses
2-Reversing rings
3-Extension tubes
I asked for advice and Gary Reese told me to focus on the extension tubes
(which I did when buying the set of 3 Hama auto extension rings). Just for
the heck of it, I simulated the effect of a reversing ring, by simply taking
a 50/1.8 and carefully holding it reversed (without a ring in between)
against the mount of the OM-40. The magnification wasn't bad, but I was very
uncomfortable with the fact that the rear element was not protected at all,
so I very quickly decided not to risk any lens to a reversing ring, but
stick with extension tubes. Yesterday the 50/3.5 I ordered a while ago
arrived, so these extension rings are not bad to complement that lens to
step away from the poor man's solution and use the better approach to macro
shots.
> Now what might be more useful would be a reversing ring with a shift
> mechanism built-in. Anyone want to donate a 35 shift to the
> conversion project? :-)
Hehehe, not a chance! :)
Cheers!
Olafo
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|