On 7/26/2021 12:24 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
I used a borrowed 600/6.5 a couple decades ago. While it was actually quite
sharp and optically well-behaved, the lens itself was a disaster to use for
three reasons:
1. Stability. The slightest bit of wind or vibration would set it off. The
way it balanced with the camera body on the tripod meant that it would rock
or oscillate. Absolutely impossible to keep it still.
2. Vibration from the aperture-actuator mechanism. It set off a resonance
in the camera/lens combination that wasn't possible to avoid.
A lens before its time! Carbon fiber tripods that damp, not amplify, vibrations, Digital cameras with Electronic
shutters and wireless remote releases make a HUGE, HUGE difference.
3. Focus mechanism. The rack-and-pinion focus was absolutely the most
absurd focus mechanism I've ever tried using. I've used RaP focus
mechanisms on other camera systems, but those seemed better balanced to the
task. The thing I hated most is that while focusing, the camera moved.
Perhaps because I expected it to be awful, I found the focusing mechanism fine.
😁
When coupled with shooting flash, the results are staggeringly sharp.
What I found interesting is that the combination of 400 mm FL on µ4/3 and ~670 on FF gave almost identical size of
subject within frame. Yes, my 600/6.5 is actually more like 670 mm. Anyway, virtually identical size in frame and close
to identical resolution.
But I got maybe two or three sharp non-flash pictures over the time I had the
lens.
A better than average hit rate?
Long and Short Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|