Hmmmmm. Lots of variables here. What the tripod sits on is a factor.
Concrete floors jiggle a lot less than flimsy wooden structures. Then
again, if you're in California the concrete may move more than the wood if
there is a damping factor. The connection of the lens/camera to the tripod
is also a factor. I have a couple of lenses that work very poorly on a
tripod unless I do tricky things to tie them down. The subject matter can be
a factor too. Those pretty models that CH photographs could set up
critical-mass vibrations in some photographers. Won't mention any names
here. I do have some vibration damper pads to sit the tripod feet on.....but
haven't tested those either. This study has already overwhelmed me and now
I've forgotten what the original goal was. /jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Moose
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 1:42 AM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] Vibration study
Sure, I'd give it a try.
Moose
Walt Wayman wrote:
>Let's see. I've got six tripods and 28 lenses. Assuming I use
>only one kind of body, that's 168 36-exp. rolls. I guess I'd
>better get started! Send me that chart right away. :-)
>
>Seriously, if we divy it up so we're not all using the same
>lens/body/tripod combination, it could work. I'd be willing to
>give it a go.
>
>
< 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 >
|