I currently have a 24mm and 35-70mm zoom. I wanted something wider than the
24mm. Is the 18mm too much of a specialty lens and 21mm the way to go, or
is the 21mm too close to the 24mm and the 18mm the way to go. Price is not
a factor (for purposes of this discussion only!).
-----Original Message-----
From: Lex Jenkins [mailto:lexjenkins@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 5:49 AM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] What lens to carry (again)
Irrelevant, Tom. But I think you knew that. I appreciate your enthusiasm
for a good debate, tho'.
Lex
===
>From: "Tom Trottier" <TomATrottier@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [OM] What lens to carry (again)
>Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 03:31:05 -0400
>
>At 2000 August 4 - Friday 2:57, Lex Jenkins <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>spoke about *Re: [OM] What lens to carry (again)...* saying
>
> > Shouldn't be any difference in light transmission regardless of how a
> > polarizer is rotated. What can vary is the light meter reading when a
> > linear polarizer is used on a camera that requires a circular polarizer
> > (like the Can-not-an-OM-on FTbn).
>
>Of course it should vary! Eliminating the sun reflection off a
>windshield could mean a couple of stops variation between one
>rotation position and 90 degrees away. The 1.3 stop suggestion is
>just an average for handheld, non-polarised lite meters.
>
>Theoretically, it should be 1 stop since you've eliminated 1/2 the
>energy by choosing the light waves energy component in just one
>direction. The other .3 is wastage in the filter.
>
>Think of it. If *all* the light were polarised in one direction,
>You'd get full transmission (less the wastage) at one rotational
>point and zero transmission 90 degrees away.
>
>Tom
>
>...
> > >From: Robinsnes@xxxxxxx
> > >Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:02:08 EDT
> > >
> > >In a message dated 8/3/00 9:35:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> > >Wayne.Harridge@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> > >
> > > > Rotated out of the
> > > > > position that cuts
> > > > > glare, it's good for about 2-3 stops like an ND. YMMV
> > > > > depending on what
> > >I was under the impression that it was always a light loss of 1.3 stops
>to
> > >adjust for the filter. Am I unaware of some changing variable?
> > >
> > >Roger Skully
> > >robinsnestphotography.com
>------------
> Tom Trottier <TomATrottier@xxxxxxxx> ICQ: 57647974
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
< 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 >
< 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 >
|