Hi Wayne,
Why did you find this setup preferrable?
Is it just because of its stability, or are there optical reasons too?
Find it difficult to understand the tubes in-between the 180/2 and the 1.4x.
I hope to be trying a more modest setup [200/4 + 65~116 + 2X-A] in this
style but would like to know the advantages a little better.
TIA,
Fernando.
------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 15:43:30 -0400
From: W Shumaker <om4t@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [OM] Re: 180/2 for macro?!
Yes, 180/2.0. Has a nice tripod ring so it is stable, gets me the working
distance and easier to focus. Typically it will be 180 + 25 + 25 + 1.4x and
no rocking the boat. (rather than 180 + 1.4x + extension, that is extension
in front of 1.4x).
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|