A scroll of mail from Mark Cassino [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 10
Feb 2001 10:36:05 -0500
Read it? y
- at 1:1 my Kiron 105mm f2.8 macro has a working room of ~135mm (it too
uses floating elements)
FA 100/f2.8 macro: 105 mm from the front of the lens filter, but that
lens is recessed about 40-50mm
Phoenix 100mm F3.5 Macro at minimum focus distance:
With 1:1 adaptor (closeup lens) - 100mm
Without 1:1 adaptor (1:2, should be same as Pentax FA 100mm F3.5) - 265mm
With 1:1 adaptor, focused to 1:2 ratio - 195mm
More rough estimates with a ruler.
Todd
At 03:45 AM 2/11/01 +0800, you wrote:
A
Thanks Boz for your patience,
let me try to put my question very simple:
When I have a normal 50mm lens and am 1m away from my subject and then change to a
100mm
lens: I can go 2m away from the subject to get it the same size (approx.). Now, is this
also true for the macros at 1:1? Can I go
Recently Wieland Willker wrote:
Thanks Boz for your patience,
No, problem. The A 1002.8 is my favorite lens, so I will gladly defend
it...
Your understanding of the working distance is correct. The thing is that
the FREE macros change their focal length but they also change the
positions
At 11:41 7.2.2001 +0100, you wrote:
Then it's time to believe... Believe that a FREE lens will offer you a far
- -superior quality between 1:2 and 1:1 magnification ratios than a
"standard" lens. I guess here we are mostly talking about corner sharpness
and focus-plane flatness.
I WANT TO
Recently Wieland Willker wrote:
Ok, but what is this good for, why this extreme shift from 100mm to 60mm?
I understand it is to improve image quality, but is this the only way
possible? Why is it not utilized for the 50mm macro?
It seems that Pentax uses FREE only for lenses thta go to 1:1,
Then it's time to believe... Believe that a FREE lens will offer you a far
- -superior quality between 1:2 and 1:1 magnification ratios than a
"standard" lens. I guess here we are mostly talking about corner sharpness
and focus-plane flatness.
I WANT TO BELIEVE!
But, the 50mm has no FREE
--- Wieland Willker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I WANT TO BELIEVE!
... it's science! ;)
I was thinking about obtaining the 100mm macro, but
now I am hesitating. I actually don't
buy a 100mm macro but a 60-70mm macro. Is this worth
the money? Hmm..., hmmm
Enablers, speak up please!
Alexander Krohe wrote:
--- Wieland Willker [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I was thinking about obtaining the 100mm macro, but
now I am hesitating. I actually don't
buy a 100mm macro but a 60-70mm macro.
Only at magnifications of 1:1 the focal length is
~60-70 mm or so.
The FA 100/3.5 is all
--- tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Krohe wrote:
--- Wieland Willker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I was thinking about obtaining the 100mm macro,
but
now I am hesitating. I actually don't
buy a 100mm macro but a 60-70mm macro.
Only at magnifications of 1:1 the focal length is
Recently Wieland Willker wrote:
Why do you need the IF for the 100mm Macro lens? What is this good for?
I mean, 60mm at 1:1, is this desirable? Is this a Macro Zoom?
It's not strictly IF, it's FREE. See here:
http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/FAQ/lens_terms.html
Cheers,
Boz
-
This message is
11 matches
Mail list logo
