April 17, 2014, 06:21:00 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - optikus

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Hi,

in general - chose the memory-device you use so, that it can take that volume of data you produce during a half day, then change to the next medium. I maximally use 16 GB cards this time. Using good pro brands reduce the risk of data loss additionally. I expect 32GB and 64 GB to be safe today, but for me this would mean to risk the results of more than a day when a card fails. Dividing up the data of improtant shootings on more than one volume is a good strategy. The incovenience of changing the memory-element is unimportant compared with the risk of loosing data. Therefore I store the data from the cam as often as possible on a laptops harddisk and copy it instantanously on a second hard disk.

J.

2
Technical Support / Re: Maintenance advice on F-1n
« on: February 15, 2014, 07:19:58 AM »
Hi,

battery should better be replaced for security reasons. Put if not used a smal peace of plasric-foil between batteriy and bottom-contact to interrupt discharge.

Store not to warm and dry, fungus can also grow if moisture is to intensive in the pentaprism-housing and in other glas parts in the camera body, not only on lenses!

Joerg

3
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: February 08, 2014, 07:07:05 AM »
Hi,

as said before, the missing of interchangeable focusing screens is a mess, not only concerning manual focus lenses - I prefer the split image as I am used to have it in my 1Ds and T90 (and added in a 10D by KatzEye), also concerning measuring purposes and architecture the grid-screens are very useful as well. So for the semi-pro and pro bodies it would be nice to see the interchangeable screens coming back with the next types.

In combination with the OTUS and other top-level-lenses a separate adjustment should be proceeded to get electronical and optical focal plane an accordance with the sensor. My 1Ds needed this, I first detecte some delta using the body with my Planar 2.0/110 and die 1.4/55 Color Ultron. I use (mostly) Dandelion programmable Chips for focus assist.

As a result of my findings I sent the body for adjustment to a workshop and then tested and adjusted the chips of the wide open lenses with a diagonal focus-test-chart until the focus indicator and the split image indicate focus simultanously.

That increases togehter with a correctly adjustes ocular the percentage of sharp images significantly.

J.

4
Lenses / Re: zooms vs primes for landscape
« on: January 26, 2014, 04:52:45 PM »
Hi,

from my point of view the discussion should not be limited to the Canon-Portfolio only - for landscape work I'd prefer primes,

a good line of wide angle lenses with fast aperture for insulation of objects, the option of stepping down is easier to have then the other way,

a very good standard lens, F1.4 or 1.2

and two longer lenses, 85 - 110 mm and a 135.

If IS is a really advantage can be discussed, for composing landscane scenes I for me use the tripod for accuracy.

My "ideal" set would be:

    Distagon 2,8 15
    Flektogon 2,8 20
    Distagon 2,8 25
    Distagon 1,4 35
    Planar 1,4 50 // alt. Distagon 1,4 55 // Color Ultron 1,4 55
    Planar 1,4 85 // Apo Lanthar 90
    Planar 2,0 110
    Apo Sonnar 2,0 135

Some are only new availlable as ZE lenses, some alternatively used also with Contax/Yashica mount. the 110 is only availlable used from Hasselblad. apo Lanthar and Color Ultron are Voigtländer brands.

The mess with the actual canon lenses is, that in my mind the colors change with the technology-standard the lens is on, an effect I did not see using the Zeiss lenses. The extremely expensive ones from Zeiss can be rented, a good choice, the rest I use when ever to get used with C/Y-Mount and Leitax-Adapters with correct infinity warranted.

From Germany

Joerg

5
Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM
« on: December 25, 2013, 10:58:30 AM »
Hi,

thanks for the images, the lens seems to proof Sigma's way to high quality with acceptable price strategy.

Joerg

6
Lenses / Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 21, 2013, 02:48:34 PM »
Hi,

I think it is important to have two things in mind:

For a professional the akquisition of equipment is a commercial calculation: what is the effect I have on my productivity and the quality of my results = the chance for having good prices for my images when akquiring what equipment - and how long does it last to compensate the invest by the inproved income. If the effect to be expected e.g. for low light shooting is good then the pricing for a special lens as the 2,8 IS will be one is secondary. And that's one side of beeing No. 1 to have such equipment in the program.

For consumer or prosumer the individual estimation in what can a new lens or body bring for the individual feeling os more important in combination what happens at home when communicating the intention to buy such expensive parts. There is a wide variety of possible tolerances and that's why you have the different product lines for private buyers.

If - as we see with the STM-Lenses and other good products in the EF-S / EF-M lineup you have secondary effects as a small equipment for the pro or video shooting in the semi professional segment then this may be inmportant to - but I think that's not the motor driving the development this moment. The increasing risk for canon that the buyer expects third party products to be as good or better than the own ones are more critical. And the pricing canon has in the prosumer and consumer area is relative high, to high as I think. The advantages to buy canon compared to sigma/tamron and how ever the brands are is not so significant that the user pays the higher canon price.

And the had serious quality problems in the past - that is in the media and therefore present in the public.

Jörg

7
Lenses / Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 21, 2013, 01:01:54 PM »
Hello from Germany,

it is fact - third party sources bring more and more lenses in a quality and with specifications, that canon has to answer. And what we saw last time in the "L" lineup is an answer. I expect, perhaps together with the rumored 1Dx-successor perhaps with high megapixel sensor that there will come more in top level area for the clientel using those equipments, perhaps with a wider spreaded typology of "L"-segment lenses and a separate lineup more for consumer purposes also in full format area. I think there will be some thinking of the future of APS-C system, we see the problems and volumes of small sensor systems in the last months and the intensive discussion on lower price 35mm-bodies - 2014 can bring some surprises.

If there will be a top level 24-80 IS then it will find it's market. No bodxy expects a 200-400 to be a mass product, but canon needs products in its lineup to demonstrate it's "No. 1"-status, and what might to this better as a prime/zoom-series competing e.g. with Zeiss Distagon 1,4/55 and the other announced products of that series? Price allone is not the objective, I think.

Jörg

8
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC
« on: December 06, 2013, 09:23:33 AM »
Hi,

I'd often thought about the further use of the 200-400's system due to it's overwhelmingly reactions in the pro's market. And what is shown here is a consequent reaction. If F5,6 is the end of what is possible may be a question, perhaps F4.5 would hit more precise what is demanded - but it is a right step on Canon's way to stay the No. 1 in the market.

Joerg

9
Sorry folks,

I understand what Canon does.

"M" first shot was a real desaster - I live here nearby Cologne and in most of my "dealers" the "M"-bodies lie at the place they were placed in delivery - other brands made the big numbers. Now - for reduced prices, this changes, but this in realted to the DSLR's a serious reason to reduce engagement in these markets. I think "M2" is a test baloon how reactions in the asian markets are and what reaction comes from Europe and the US - if there is a serious interest the analysts detect I expect "M2" on our markets too. But the demands for the system as a package with more attractive lenses and so on is here on a higher level then otherwhere - and Canon does good to avoid a second mess in introduction of a 'new' product family

Joerg

10
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma for night sky
« on: November 21, 2013, 04:04:13 AM »
Hello,

for optimal results in night-sky applikation with relatively low cost I propose

Y/C-Zeiss Distagon for the low end if focal length, adaption to EOS is no serieous problem, but not all lenses fit with full format mirror (!) - and modding the mirror is not anyone's business - but if more often used no bad idea - concerning the costs of newer ultra-wide lenses and regarfing the outstanding quality of the Zeiss-lenses.

For 50 -> 350mm focal length you have the option of using the Hasselblad-F-Lenses, perfect flat and very very sharp, nearly no vignetting due to the large image-circle. Adapters in very good brass quality are on the market.

My five pence,

Joerg

11
Lenses / Re: What's your oldest Canon EF lens?
« on: July 20, 2013, 10:34:53 AM »
Hello,

exactly that 28-80 is actually on my D60 (NOT 60D!) - and it is pretty good there. Have it with me nearly every day on the banks of the middle Rhine.

I think it is my oldest EF.

Joerg

12
Canon General / Re: POLL: Satisfaction Level With Canon products.
« on: July 19, 2013, 01:16:56 AM »
... if I should rate them: 85/100.

They make good things, some with the potencial to be improved but in general I use Canon cameras, lenses and accessories and will do so in the future. I didn't find a better system for my requirements so far.

Joerg

13
Click on the attachments and other options link below the text box when you post.  That will let you upload a small image (800 X 800) ??
I'm curious as to how you could use a 44mm flange back lens on a 44mm flange back camera and get infinity focus, it would not focus to infinity unless the adaptor had zero thickness, or unless you modified the lens by replacing the mount.
M42 lenses with their 45.5 mm flange distance are commonly used on Canon EOS bodies. Some M39 lenses had 45.5mm flange back distances, I don't know about the Pauxette.

Hi,

thenk you for the input, I try asap.

The solution is easy.

The EF-mount is wide enough to remove enough material from a commercial Leica-EOS-Adapter (or a M42-EOS-Adapter with an additional reducion-ring M42/M39) in a smaller diameter then the EOS-mouth and have a stable adapter as good as before, if you find an adapter made of a very good material. Therefore we use only brass adapters and none from aluminium.

There is not very much metall remaining between the machined area of the adapter and the mouth of the EF-mount - but enough. It only works because of the very small dimensions of the Paxette-Lenses, they dive in the EF-mount, to use a imaginable metapher.

Joerg

14
Hello community,

after a little bit of preparation of some photos now the story also in English.



The idea came up when a discussion came up in the digicamclub about adapting the various M39-Paxette-lenses via the VNEX-adaption-system to NEX-bodies. It was posted, that the distance between film and mount of the paxette is 44mm, the same as the EOS-system has.

On the market there are various Leica-thread-mount adapters to EOS, which allow macro use only due to the very much shorter flange distance of the Leica compared with the EOS-bayonett. But the idea came up to modify such an adapter mechanically to make it possible to screw in a Paxette lens and get it on the right position for achieving infinity-position correctly. That would mean bringing it to the exakt parallel point of the EOS-bayonett-mount of the camera body.

The lenses of the paxette are pretty small - after some experiments we found adapters to use them as basis material for the modification which are stable enouht to accept the reduction of brass in the critical mount-level withour breaking up and fitting the widest possible range of paxette-lenses we could find to get their mechanical dimensions. With the now found solution all know Paxette-lenses can be mounted to a EOS-body.

But there are restrictions.

Those lenses with a very short construction on the cameras side can be used with EF and EF-S mount = fitting full format bodies. Example is the Schneider Xenar 1:2,8/50mm, (tested with s/n 4220026) and the Staeble Telexon -E- 1:5,6/85mm (tested with s/n 527602).

The midrange of constructions, as the Roeschlein Telenar -E- 1:5,6/135mm and the Roeschlein Telenar -E- 1:3,8/90mm can be used with EF-S bodies, due to mechanical components colliding with the mirror of FV-bodies. (testes with Roeschlein Telenar -E- 135mm s/n 188201 and Telenar -E- 90mm 119302)

Some short lenses, possibly older ones, have an additional tubus on the back side, potencially for an intendet coupled d-meter, which never came in the camera, those lenses are only for macro use with the bellows, e.g. the Staeble-Choro -R- 1:3,5/38mm (tested with s/n 384419) and the Steinheil Cassarit 1:2,8/45mm (s/n 1033635). I tell you the serial numbers to refer to this explicite lenses, it may be that there are versions of them with different structures, at this moment i don't know any - but I'm not God.



The image above shows the different structures on the body-side of the lenses.

Right row downwards: Steinheil 45mm - Staeble-Choro 38mm - Schneider 50mm
Left row downwards: Roeschlein 135mm in adapter-prototype - Roeschlein 90mm - Staeble 85mm



Here my EOS 400D with three adapted lenses in the new adapters, one adapter on the camera withour lens.



Impressive, how small these lenses are compared to the known dimensions of our today-equipment.



The Roeschlein 90mm is the lens with the best performance in my set - but it needs some additional time and things like lens hoods to test them all correctly.

Right click on the image-symbols -> opens them in a separate window.

Joerg


15
Good morning, forum!

In the german "Digicamclub"-forum for manuel lenses on digital cameras we developped a special adapter to use the ancient M39-Lenses for the "teacher's Leica" Paxette, manufactured by Braun, Nürnberg also with Canon EOS bodies. There are Lenses from Steinheil (Muenchen), Schneider (Kreuznach), Roeschlein (Kreuznach), Enna (München), Braun and Staeble (Nürnberg) and other well known german manufacturers on the market.

Due to the longer flange-distance (compared to LTM) of 44mm it is possible to make adapters which allow infinity-focusing correctly.

If interested you will find an actual information (in german) here:

Werte Forenkolleginnen und Kollegen,

wir hatten vor einiger Zeit das Thema Adaption der M39-Objektive der Paxette (Auflagemaß nominal 44mm) an das EOS-System.

Dazu gab es im Digicamclub eine fruchtbare Diskussion, die zur Herstellung einer Messing-Kleinserie von speziellen M39-EOS-Adaptern geführt hat, die eine Eindrehung erhalten haben, so dass eine korrekte Unendlich-Einstellung möglich ist. Die meisten (nicht alle !) Paxette-Objektive lassen sich einwandfrei am EF-S-Bajonett der APS-C-Kameras nutzen, eine Reihe auch am EF-Bajonett der Vollformatkameras. Lediglich die Objektive mit verlängertem Hinterbau scheiden ohne auszugsverlängerndes Zubehör aus und bleiben damit dem Makro-Bereich vorbehalten.

Thread -> http://www.digicamclub.de/showthread...998#post195998

Wer mehr über das Thema und seine Anfänge erfahren möchte:

- http://www.digicamclub.de/showthread...axette+adapter
- http://www.digicamclub.de/showthread...hlight=telexon
- http://www.digicamclub.de/showthread...l=1#post175541

Im Digicamclub gibt es darüber hinaus - Stichwort VNex - einiges mehr zur Verwendung dieser Objektive am NEX-System.


If there is any interest contact me, some of these adapters are still available.

Joerg

Pages: [1] 2 3