Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Stan, responses below... Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Stan Halpin Subject: Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm] This is a laggardly response Ken... I still have the 300mm and occasionally think I really should do something about a lens-collar-mount. I bought the lens from Peter P. in Colorado, he had had a custom built tripod mount for it, but sold that separately. Is that the one you bought? Yes it is. I have considered going to a local machinist, or into my own workshop and making a simple L-shaped bracket that would attach to the camera, extend forward and then up to support the lens from the bottom. A 1/4-20 hole drilled in the bracket would allow me to mount it on a tripod... Does this make sense? Sounds feasible, but I suggest you might want to think about adding some means of cradling/securing the lens to the end of the bracket. And obviously you'd want to locate the 1/4-20 hole to achieve a neutral balance of the lens/mount. Stan on 11/20/03 8:04 PM, Kenneth Waller at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stan, I have the mount for this lens that you referred to. It was also bought from a list member. I haven't used it much, but I can see it needs modification. A two piece ring spacer is positioned around the lens body and this spacer then fits into a ring receptacle and is retained by tightening one fingerscrew, this results in basically a two point contact between the spacer and ring receptacle. A similar mount (for a N***n lens, also sold without a mount) is made by Kirk. It's method of lens retention to mount results in a more positive, uniform retention. The mount I have definitely produces a more balanced assembly (camera body/lens), but it does not firmly attach to the lens and this leads to movement of the lens/camera body relative to the mount itself. It looks like I should be able to come up with something that will lessen this effect. I have had the 300 mm f4.5 FA for several years and it is one of my favorites and most used. I have no complaints with it but the lack of balance does seem wrong. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 9:44 PM Subject: Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm] on 11/18/03 7:52 PM, jmb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stan, I wonder if a tripod mountable lens holding device for these has been invented? John 3030 tripod head. The 300mm does not have a tripod mount, so it was hanging off the 2X extender, just floating around in the breeze. For some shots later I used the self-timer with mirror lockup but for these bird shots I used neither a remote nor the timer. stan The list member who sold me the lens also provided a reference to a shop which will fabricate a tripod mount for this (or about any other) lens. I have the info stashed away someplace but have not followed up on it... Stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
This is a laggardly response Ken... I still have the 300mm and occasionally think I really should do something about a lens-collar-mount. I bought the lens from Peter P. in Colorado, he had had a custom built tripod mount for it, but sold that separately. Is that the one you bought? I have considered going to a local machinist, or into my own workshop and making a simple L-shaped bracket that would attach to the camera, extend forward and then up to support the lens from the bottom. A 1/4-20 hole drilled in the bracket would allow me to mount it on a tripod... Does this make sense? Stan on 11/20/03 8:04 PM, Kenneth Waller at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stan, I have the mount for this lens that you referred to. It was also bought from a list member. I haven't used it much, but I can see it needs modification. A two piece ring spacer is positioned around the lens body and this spacer then fits into a ring receptacle and is retained by tightening one fingerscrew, this results in basically a two point contact between the spacer and ring receptacle. A similar mount (for a N***n lens, also sold without a mount) is made by Kirk. It's method of lens retention to mount results in a more positive, uniform retention. The mount I have definitely produces a more balanced assembly (camera body/lens), but it does not firmly attach to the lens and this leads to movement of the lens/camera body relative to the mount itself. It looks like I should be able to come up with something that will lessen this effect. I have had the 300 mm f4.5 FA for several years and it is one of my favorites and most used. I have no complaints with it but the lack of balance does seem wrong. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 9:44 PM Subject: Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm] on 11/18/03 7:52 PM, jmb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stan, I wonder if a tripod mountable lens holding device for these has been invented? John 3030 tripod head. The 300mm does not have a tripod mount, so it was hanging off the 2X extender, just floating around in the breeze. For some shots later I used the self-timer with mirror lockup but for these bird shots I used neither a remote nor the timer. stan The list member who sold me the lens also provided a reference to a shop which will fabricate a tripod mount for this (or about any other) lens. I have the info stashed away someplace but have not followed up on it... Stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
No need for anything custom here Stan. Manfrotto has already made it for you and it is relatively inexpensive. I don't know the exact item number but take a look on BH and I'm sure you will find it... Vic PS. I suspect you are talking about the 300 A* F4... This is a laggardly response Ken... I still have the 300mm and occasionally think I really should do something about a lens-collar-mount. I bought the lens from Peter P. in Colorado, he had had a custom built tripod mount for it, but sold that separately. Is that the one you bought? I have considered going to a local machinist, or into my own workshop and making a simple L-shaped bracket that would attach to the camera, extend forward and then up to support the lens from the bottom. A 1/4-20 hole drilled in the bracket would allow me to mount it on a tripod... Does this make sense? Stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Stan will this work I think it is completely adjustable. It's not custom but it's only $56 bucks... Vic http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=detailsQ=sku =126662is=REG
oops (was Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm])
Actually Vic, I was referring to the FA 300/4.5. I had meant that a a side msg to Ken, not to the list. It would have made more sense if I had copied the original msg, and it would have made even more sense if I had sent it just to Ken as I intended. I hit the wrong button. But thanks for your comment. It is late, I've spent too much time on web design and otherwise staring at the computer the last few days. Stan on 12/07/03 10:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No need for anything custom here Stan. Manfrotto has already made it for you and it is relatively inexpensive. I don't know the exact item number but take a look on BH and I'm sure you will find it... Vic PS. I suspect you are talking about the 300 A* F4... This is a laggardly response Ken... I still have the 300mm and occasionally think I really should do something about a lens-collar-mount. I bought the lens from Peter P. in Colorado, he had had a custom built tripod mount for it, but sold that separately. Is that the one you bought? I have considered going to a local machinist, or into my own workshop and making a simple L-shaped bracket that would attach to the camera, extend forward and then up to support the lens from the bottom. A 1/4-20 hole drilled in the bracket would allow me to mount it on a tripod... Does this make sense? Stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
on 12/07/03 11:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stan will this work I think it is completely adjustable. It's not custom but it's only $56 bucks... Vic http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=detailsQ=sku =126662is=REG Thanks Vic. This does look interesting. I am puzzled though - it looks as though there is a strap at the front that would pull down on the lens - I would have expected a brace that would hold the front of the lens up... Stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Yes Stan it does have a Rubber brace that the front of the lens sits on. You can kind of see it in the picutre. The strap just keeps it nice and tight to prevent it from moving. The whole unit can be put on a quick release plate and snapped on and off your tripod quickly. The beauty of it is it can probably work with a number of your longer lenses.. Vic Thanks Vic. This does look interesting. I am puzzled though - it looks as though there is a strap at the front that would pull down on the lens - I would have expected a brace that would hold the front of the lens up... Stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Stan, I have the mount for this lens that you referred to. It was also bought from a list member. I haven't used it much, but I can see it needs modification. A two piece ring spacer is positioned around the lens body and this spacer then fits into a ring receptacle and is retained by tightening one fingerscrew, this results in basically a two point contact between the spacer and ring receptacle. A similar mount (for a N***n lens, also sold without a mount) is made by Kirk. It's method of lens retention to mount results in a more positive, uniform retention. The mount I have definitely produces a more balanced assembly (camera body/lens), but it does not firmly attach to the lens and this leads to movement of the lens/camera body relative to the mount itself. It looks like I should be able to come up with something that will lessen this effect. I have had the 300 mm f4.5 FA for several years and it is one of my favorites and most used. I have no complaints with it but the lack of balance does seem wrong. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 9:44 PM Subject: Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm] on 11/18/03 7:52 PM, jmb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stan, I wonder if a tripod mountable lens holding device for these has been invented? John 3030 tripod head. The 300mm does not have a tripod mount, so it was hanging off the 2X extender, just floating around in the breeze. For some shots later I used the self-timer with mirror lockup but for these bird shots I used neither a remote nor the timer. stan The list member who sold me the lens also provided a reference to a shop which will fabricate a tripod mount for this (or about any other) lens. I have the info stashed away someplace but have not followed up on it... Stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Doug - I have changed to accommodate silly HTML restrictions! (The original worked fine on my system...) They're not necessarily silly, Shel. Try: http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/birdOnWire.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/redTwig.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg [no change] Nice photos, Shel. (And useful for me to look at, since these are among the sort of photos that I often take). A couple of questions, though: 1. In the birdOnWire, what is the bird? (I'm not familiar with western US birds at all.) It sort of reminds me of an Eastern Bluebird.) The 2X-S did a pretty good job on that lens. 2. In the cardinal, was the focusing done manually or automatically? (With all the branches around, I'm guessing that autofocus might have been easily fooled.) Nice bokeh. Fred, K1FW
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
So that`s where the %20`s come from. Thanks, I always wondered where they came from. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California Spaces aren't legal in a URL. They need to be replaced with %20 for most browsers, though Internet Exploder might work with them. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Stan, I see nothing wrong with these technically on my monitor. So this is effectively 600+ telephoto (900?)! What tripod setup did you use? Run! Don't walk! to buy this! For academic interest, herewith is presented a shot with *ist-D at ISO 200, FA* 300mm/4.5 plus Pentax A-2X-S. The really curious may contact me off list and I can provide the original jpeg. Thanks, John
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Hi Stan, On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:14:21 -0600, Stan Halpin wrote: Doug - I have changed to accommodate silly HTML restrictions! (The original worked fine on my system...) Yep, I found out the problem several years ago by posting files with spaces in their names. Pretty embarassing for a professional computer geek. :-) Try: http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/birdOnWire.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/redTwig.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg [no change] Nice shots. Thanks for pointing out the problem. You're welcome. I'm good at pointing out problems. I'm less good at resolving them. :-) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Hi Steve, On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:10:10 -0800, Steve Larson wrote: So that`s where the %20`s come from. Thanks, I always wondered where they came from. When you see a %xx in a URL, it's replacing a character that's restricted. You most often see it with spaces (%20) and plus signs (%2B) but any ASCII character can be represented this way. The number is simply the hexadecimal value of the ASCII code for the character. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Fred, Shel? He is the luddite in a different thread. This is Stan, I am the early-adopter out here on the bleeding edge of technology... BTW, I do know the value of standards which conform to the lowest common denominator, and it is after all still unusual for an OS to be able to deal with file names containing spaces. So my comment about the silly HTML restrictions was in self-deprecating jest. RE your questions, 1. I am not sure what the birdonawire is, but it is probably an EasternBlueBird (not all that uncommon here in Western Missouri). 2. The cardinal shot (and all of the others) was done with manual focus. I was on the SkyLineDrive in Virginia last week. I was stopped on the road, in the driver's seat, looking through the right-side window at a black bear who was standing upright facing us with his forefeet on a low stone wall at the edge of he road. Maybe 10 feet away. I leaned over my wife (in the passenger seat), held the ist-D plus FA 77mm lens toward that side of the van, and began pushing the shutter button. The autofocus never focused, no shot was taken. Then he moved as though to come toward us, my wife said something to the effect of that she was too near the bear which was headed toward her open window (actually, I think she may have said oh sh--, I am offering a liberal interpretation.) I wasn't sure how sedentary these birds would be, I wanted to take the picture already and not worry about the AF. Normally I love it, but not for these sort of shots. on 11/18/03 6:41 AM, Fred at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Doug - I have changed to accommodate silly HTML restrictions! (The original worked fine on my system...) They're not necessarily silly, Shel. Try: http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/birdOnWire.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/redTwig.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg [no change] Nice photos, Shel. (And useful for me to look at, since these are among the sort of photos that I often take). A couple of questions, though: 1. In the birdOnWire, what is the bird? (I'm not familiar with western US birds at all.) It sort of reminds me of an Eastern Bluebird.) The 2X-S did a pretty good job on that lens. 2. In the cardinal, was the focusing done manually or automatically? (With all the branches around, I'm guessing that autofocus might have been easily fooled.) Nice bokeh. Fred, K1FW
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
on 11/18/03 7:17 AM, jmb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stan, I see nothing wrong with these technically on my monitor. So this is effectively 600+ telephoto (900?)! What tripod setup did you use? Run! Don't walk! to buy this! For academic interest, herewith is presented a shot with *ist-D at ISO 200, FA* 300mm/4.5 plus Pentax A-2X-S. The really curious may contact me off list and I can provide the original jpeg. Thanks, John I have a relatively low-end Bogen 3205 (= Manfrotto 190B?) tripod with 3030 tripod head. The 300mm does not have a tripod mount, so it was hanging off the 2X extender, just floating around in the breeze. For some shots later I used the self-timer with mirror lockup but for these bird shots I used neither a remote nor the timer. stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Hi Steve, On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:10:10 -0800, Steve Larson wrote: So that`s where the %20`s come from. Thanks, I always wondered where they came from. When you see a %xx in a URL, it's replacing a character that's restricted. You most often see it with spaces (%20) and plus signs (%2B) but any ASCII character can be represented this way. The number is simply the hexadecimal value of the ASCII code for the character. Incidentally, the viewer-friendly way to represent spaces in a URL is with a + sign, not with a %20. Thus Bird+On+Wire should have worked.
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, John Francis wrote: When you see a %xx in a URL, it's replacing a character that's restricted. You most often see it with spaces (%20) and plus signs (%2B) but any ASCII character can be represented this way. The number is simply the hexadecimal value of the ASCII code for the character. Incidentally, the viewer-friendly way to represent spaces in a URL is with a + sign, not with a %20. Thus Bird+On+Wire should have worked. Right but wrong. A + sign means space within a query string (the part of the URL that comes after a ? sign) but not in the filename part of the URL. Try these for example: http://anders.hultman.nu/ss 4.gif http://anders.hultman.nu/ss+4.gif http://anders.hultman.nu/ss%204.gif anders - http://anders.hultman.nu/
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Hi Doug, Thanks for the great explanation! Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 6:01 AM Subject: Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm] Hi Steve, On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:10:10 -0800, Steve Larson wrote: So that`s where the %20`s come from. Thanks, I always wondered where they came from. When you see a %xx in a URL, it's replacing a character that's restricted. You most often see it with spaces (%20) and plus signs (%2B) but any ASCII character can be represented this way. The number is simply the hexadecimal value of the ASCII code for the character. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Stan, I wonder if a tripod mountable lens holding device for these has been invented? John 3030 tripod head. The 300mm does not have a tripod mount, so it was hanging off the 2X extender, just floating around in the breeze. For some shots later I used the self-timer with mirror lockup but for these bird shots I used neither a remote nor the timer. stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
on 11/13/03 6:44 PM, John Francis at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Francis wrote: somewhat from chromatic aberration, especially in the corners. On my monitor all the bright white edges have the blue CA. Even on the back dark edge of the geese' wings. Could this be the lenses used? I was surprised to see it with the A* 200mm. It wan't an A* 200 alone - it was with the 1.7AF adapter. I don't have test images with just the A*200, yet; I was trying the lens+TC pairing because it's something I would be able to use on the *ist-D; I often use the same AF adapter with a 300mm with a film body. Unfortunately it seems to not work as well with the 200mm. For academic interest, herewith is presented a shot with *ist-D at ISO 200, FA* 300mm/4.5 plus Pentax A-2X-S. The really curious may contact me off list and I can provide the original jpeg. http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/bird on wire.jpg for others with the 300mm alone, see http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/red twig.jpg and http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg Stan
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Stan, On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:31:42 -0600, Stan Halpin wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/bird on wire.jpg for others with the 300mm alone, see http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/red twig.jpg and http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg Spaces aren't legal in a URL. They need to be replaced with %20 for most browsers, though Internet Exploder might work with them. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
on 11/17/03 11:41 PM, Doug Franklin at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:31:42 -0600, Stan Halpin wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/bird on wire.jpg for others with the 300mm alone, see http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/red twig.jpg and http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg Spaces aren't legal in a URL. They need to be replaced with %20 for most browsers, though Internet Exploder might work with them. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ Doug - I have changed to accommodate silly HTML restrictions! (The original worked fine on my system...) Try: http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/birdOnWire.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/redTwig.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg [no change] Thanks for pointing out the problem. Stan
RE: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm]
Those are great pictures!!! I got to start saving up for this nice little baby... Andy -Original Message- From: Stan Halpin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: More *ist-D images [FA* 300mm] on 11/17/03 11:41 PM, Doug Franklin at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:31:42 -0600, Stan Halpin wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/bird on wire.jpg for others with the 300mm alone, see http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/red twig.jpg and http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg Spaces aren't legal in a URL. They need to be replaced with %20 for most browsers, though Internet Exploder might work with them. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ Doug - I have changed to accommodate silly HTML restrictions! (The original worked fine on my system...) Try: http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/birdOnWire.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/redTwig.jpg http://home.earthlink.net/~smh645/cardinal.jpg [no change] Thanks for pointing out the problem. Stan
