Been keeping up with reading the list but no time to post so here's a
summary.
Fisheye, I soaked teh doiublet in acetone overnight and managed to split
them apart, I used pressure to slide them apart it took some courage and
force, but they seperated fine. The problem came when, once seperated I
put the yellowish tinted concave/convex element back in the acetone to
soak the rest of the cement off - when I removed it it was chipped and
the remnents still in the acetone, I have no idea how this happened, the
only thing I can think of is maybe the glass container was knocked at
some point (no proof so can't blame the boys or wife ;-) ).
here is the chip http://thattimeoflife.smugmug.com/photos/45391591-M.jpg
I spoke to the guy who offererd to re cement the lenses and we agreed
the best course of action is to fill it with black paint, I don't think
it will affect image quality as it is just outside the light path. next
image shows it painted out.
http://thattimeoflife.smugmug.com/photos/46280792-M-0.jpg sorry about
the quality of this photo, but rushed it and it looked in focus on the
E1
Now I will post the elements off to get recemented and hope it works out
okay.
As some of you know our new born son is staying long term in hospital,
we have been using the E1 and 14-45 to take daily photographs to update
the family and preferring not to use flash (to disturb others to much).
Unfortunately My wife likes using the E1 because my point and shoot is
so slow, so having been outbid on a new 35-80 F2.8 I decided to upgrade
to the 14-54 (which has come down in price here - sorry John) in the
hope that it provides more accurate focusing at the lower light levels.
My first impression is that sharpness is the same or no better than the
14-45 but it does focus much nearer for macro and it just feels more
solid and I think it is better in low light focussing but I am not sure
if it is me justifying it to myself and I think in normal circumstances
I could live happily with the 14-45. I did debate whether the 11-22
option might be better but the 14-54 is way cheaper and I can sell the
14-45 to an E500 user. I don't plan on buying any more digital zuiko
glass - because I will probably go full frame in a year or two.
That brings us nicely into the E500, a pal from work decided that he
needed a camera to take macro pictures of minatures, so naturaaly I
suggested the E500 with the DZ50 macro, he is more impulsive than me
though and bought the e500 two lens kit (he got a free selphy with the
deal)and listening to my advice a really decent expensive tripod. First
test pictures however didn't impress, so I have brought in some of the
OM lenses we tested on the 20D just to compare. From the feel I like the
E500 but I wouldn't swap the E1 for it.
Ian
more pictures and latest on Cai at www.thattimeoflife.smugmug.com - itsy
becomes cai -
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
