Matthew Hunt wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
Examples:
100mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 15-20m;
50mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 7-10m;
28mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 3m!
I used the "Tabl
Charles Robinson wrote:
On Mar 15, 2011, at 17:02, Dario Bonazza wrote:
With a Samyang 8mm fisheye, there's no way to focus (lens helicoid has no
run enough to find focus). It happens that by setting the focus at its
minimum focus distance, the lens is almost (but not yet) focused at
infini
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
> Examples:
> 100mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 15-20m;
> 50mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 7-10m;
> 28mm lens focused at infinity -> focusing ring is set at 3m!
I used the "Table Output" feature
On Mar 15, 2011, at 17:02, Dario Bonazza wrote:
>
> With a Samyang 8mm fisheye, there's no way to focus (lens helicoid has no run
> enough to find focus). It happens that by setting the focus at its minimum
> focus distance, the lens is almost (but not yet) focused at infinity. By
> approaching
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:06 PM, wrote:
> Be ashamed, Matt. Privately pleased, but publically ashamed.
Well, now you've done it. My blog has a new subhead. The previous one
lasted all of 3 hours.
http://scotchtape.ductwhisky.com/p/taglines.html
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
.@pdml.net
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:00:57
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
The hugely expensive Novoflex adapters are only really necessary with
Pentax lenses that do not have an aperture ring. They allow manual
adj
Be ashamed, Matt. Privately pleased, but publically ashamed.
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Hunt
Sender: pdml-boun...@pdml.net
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 20:59:11
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
On Tue
I stand corrected. I appreciate having a reason not to buy it.
-Original Message-
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
Sender: pdml-boun...@pdml.net
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:00:57
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
The
com/group/cdsound/
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
>> Dario Bonazza
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 8:05 PM
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> I bought a different one, which allows focus slightly beyond infinity.
The Buzz Lightyear Signature Edition, of course.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from t
Your adapter is setting the mount register too deep. I had the same
thing happen with a Pentax M42 adapter. I bought a different one,
which allows focus slightly beyond infinity. Cost me $6 for the
replacement.
Most lens mount adapters for FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds
intentionally run about ha
t;
> -Original Message-
> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
> Dario Bonazza
> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 8:05 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
>
>
> Let's do some math:
&g
/group/cdsound/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Dario Bonazza
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 8:05 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
Let's do some math:
K bayonet register = 45.46mm
m4/3
From: "Dario Bonazza"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
No name on it, found in ebay from Hong Kong. I bought it some time ago,
but I can no longer find trace of that auction. However, it
It sounds to me that you're adapter doesn't supply the proper flange
distance. Maybe it doesn't even keep the planes parallel.
On 3/15/2011 6:02 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Hello gang,
I've just tried a few Pentax lenses on my Panny GF-1 (via K-micro4/3
adapter), just to find a weird behaviour.
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Steven Desjardins
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 6:54 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
I'd like to hear this myself. What brand of adaptor?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at
ario
- Original Message -
From: "Steven Desjardins"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax glass on m4/3: weird behavior
I'd like to hear this myself. What brand of adaptor?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Dario Bonaz
I'd like to hear this myself. What brand of adaptor?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
> Hello gang,
>
> I've just tried a few Pentax lenses on my Panny GF-1 (via K-micro4/3
> adapter), just to find a weird behaviour.
>
> With close subjects (inches to meters), the actual dis
Hello gang,
I've just tried a few Pentax lenses on my Panny GF-1 (via K-micro4/3
adapter), just to find a weird behaviour.
With close subjects (inches to meters), the actual distance of my subject
(properly focused by looking at magnified LCD) can be similar to that one
indicated on the dist
19 matches
Mail list logo
