Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Add-On Lenses (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/add-lenses-49/)
-   -   Reverse mounting ? (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/add-lenses-49/reverse-mounting-15040/)

Terapixel Oct 20, 2003 10:08 AM

Reverse mounting ?
 
Help from you Pundits out there please:

*Why do you reverse mount a lens ?
*How do you reverse mount a lens? (have any pics of reverse mounted lenses?)
*Know of any reverse mountable lenses for a Canon Powershot A40?

Much appreciated!

shene Oct 20, 2003 2:16 PM

Re: Reverse mounting ?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Terapixel

*Why do you reverse mount a lens ?

This is because reverse mounting can yield very high magnification. If the reverse-mounted lens has focal length X and the on-camera lens has focal length Y (in actual number rather than its 35mm equivalent), the magnification is Y/X. Or, if you prefer to use diopter, the reverse mounted lens has a diopter of 1000/X. Thus, a 50mm SLR lens is a +20 diopter close-up lens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terapixel

*How do you reverse mount a lens? (have any pics of reverse mounted lenses?)

There are pages in my 4500 user guide explaining how to do it: the "TC-E2 for Close-Up" in the Odd Stuffs section and the "It All Starts with Thread Size and Rings" page in the Filters section. There are other actual unedited and tested shots that are searchable at DPreview's site www.dpreview.com So, search the Nikon Talk Forum and you should be able to find them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terapixel

*Know of any reverse mountable lenses for a Canon Powershot A40?

Any good normal and wide angle lens with flat field can be reversed. It does not have be a Canon. Choose the one whose front glass can go very close to the front glass of the on-camera lens when it is zoomed all the way in. The quality, in general, depends on your on-camera lens.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

Terapixel Oct 20, 2003 3:08 PM

re: Reverse mounting
 
Thanks shene, much appreciated. I could not find a photo of what a camera lools like with a reverse mounted lens on it though. Can you reverse mount a lens to make a telephoto lens or is it just for macro photography?

shene Oct 20, 2003 7:19 PM

Re: re: Reverse mounting
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Terapixel
I could not find a photo of what a camera lools like with a reverse mounted lens on it though. Can you reverse mount a lens to make a telephoto lens or is it just for macro photography?

In fact, the "TC-E2 for Close-Up" page does have a number of photos of reverse-mounting a Nikon 55mm on a TC-E2 teleconverter, which is than mounted on a Nikon Coolpix 990.
Here is a more recent example. The following shows the result of mounting a Nikon AFD 50mm F1.8 on a Nikon Coolpix 5700. To do so, we need a macro coupler. A macro coupler has two male threads, one for the camera lens and the other for the reverse-mounting lens. Since I use a AFD Nikon 50mm F1.8, which has a 52mm thread, the macro coupler shown has one end of 52mm. The Nikon Coolpix 5700 requires an adapter for using converters. The following shows the Nextphoto 5700 Coolfix adapter http://members.rogers.com/nextphoto/coolfix5700.htm This adapter has a 62mm thread size, and, hence, a 62-52mm step-down ring is needed. Choose your macro coupler and step rings to fit your camera and the SLR lens.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...erse-set-s.jpg

Now, screw the macro coupler on to the SLR lens thread, followed by the step ring:
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...th-rings-s.jpg

If an adapter is needed, screw the adapter to the step ring as shown below:
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...extphoto-s.jpg

Finally, put the whole thing on to your camera, and the result is
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...-mounted-s.jpg

There are a couple of points to be made. FIRST, use the longest focal length to yield maximum magnification. SECOND, use the largest aperture of the SLR lens. It is F1.8 as shown in the above images. This will provide more light for the camera to focus. If your SLR lens has a lock, release it so that you can turn the aperture ring to get the maximum aperture. THIRD, set the SLR lens to infinity or minimum focusing distance and use the camera to focus. Yes, you can use the focusing ring of the SLR lens to focus; but, it would give you much difference. Move the camera to frame and focus approximately. Then, allow the camera's AF system to do the remaining.

Hope this helps and happy shooting.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

djb Oct 20, 2003 9:10 PM

am i safe to assume that it is better to have a lens used to reverse with the same or larger thread size than the camera's fixed lens?
also is there any place to buy these male-male stepdown rings?

dennis

shene Oct 20, 2003 9:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djb
am i safe to assume that it is better to have a lens used to reverse with the same or larger thread size than the camera's fixed lens?

The answer is YES and NO. In other words, thread size is not the keep issue. The key issue is the angle of view of each lens. Some lenses may have a small front glass and yet its thread size is quite large. The Nikon AFD 50mm F1.8 is a good example. The reason is that companies usually prefer to standardize the thread size of their lenses. So, the question is if one can move the on-camera lens very close to the reversed lens. If we could, the image quality is better, light loss is less significant, and vignetting is unlikely. Since digital cameras usually have odd size lenses, it would be much better doing some tests before commit to this reverse mounting technique.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djb
also is there any place to buy these male-male stepdown rings?

There are many places one can find macro couplers. For example B&H http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont....x=5&image.y=4

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500

djb Oct 20, 2003 10:33 PM

shene, you're absolutely correct. i forgot about angle of view. i have all sorts of lenses to try. i know i have an old canon 50mm f/1.4 at home as well as a 24mm f/2.8. i can't remember the filter size. i'll check out the urls you indicated. thanx!!

dennis

Terapixel Oct 21, 2003 9:16 AM

Re. reverse mounting
 
Thanks shene, much appreciated - specially the photos. Gonna go get my lens now !

richardh Oct 21, 2003 4:18 PM

This is about what to expect as far as magnification from the a40. these were taken with an a70 but the lens system uses the same size elements and same sensor size. This is a 50mm lens by the way.
http://www.pbase.com/richardh/slr_macro
Two were taken with the a70 at 3x zoom. The other two were taken with the reversed 50mm slr and with the camera at 3x zoom. I was just starting out with macros so they are a little fuzzy but the magnification is accurate to what you will get.
Corection:
The a40 cannot focus as close as the a70 (it has been a while since I used it). I just took a couple of pics with the a40. I cannot explain it but without the slr lens the a40 could not focus as close as athe a70, which is expected, but with the slr lens, the a40 did focus as close as the a70?
Here are quick sample pics with the a40 and a reversed 50mm slr lens (the same lens used on the above a70 pics).
http://www.pbase.com/richardh/a40slrmacro
I am uploading them now so they should be there in about half an hour (dial up).

shene Oct 22, 2003 2:21 AM

Re: Reverse mounting ?
 
Here are some examples of using reverse mounting SLR lens. The measurement is not exact; but, they should be very close to the true value. The following image is taken with a 5700 at its minimum focusing distance and longest "macro" focal length (i.e., yellow flower). Its width is about 30mm.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...lar-5700-s.jpg

This one is taken with a Nikon 50mm F1.8 reversed. Its width is about 8.5mm, which is 3.5X larger than that of the 5700.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...0mm-5700-s.jpg

The CCD of the 5700 is 2/3" with width and height 8.8mm and 6.6mm, respectively. Thus, the magnification of the 5700 shown above is 8.8/30=0.29=0.3X of life size, and the reverse mounting one is 8.8/8.5=1X about life size.

The next one is taken with 5700 in macro mode.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...oin-5700-s.jpg

And, this one is taken with 5700 and a reverse mounted Nikon 50mm F1.8. As you see from this and the previous one, corner sharpness is not so great. This is due to a number of reasons. FIRST, the 50mm F1.8 used F1.8. Stop it down a little will definitely improve sharpness. SECOND, to use higher shutter speed, the 5700 also used larger aperture (F3.x?). Close it down will improve sharpness. The upper edge is not sharp because the camera was not leveled. (I only wanted to show magnification rather than sharpness, and the latter can be judged quite easily.)

http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...oin-50mm-s.jpg

Raynox has a very reasonable macro lens, MSN-500, designed for Nikon Coolpix 9xx and 4500 series. But, it can also be used on a 5700 without vignetting. See below.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/5700-MSN-500-s.jpg

Here is the result. Unfortunately, the 5700 magnifies the deficiency of the MSN-500 too much, and the image quality is simply not good.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...-MSN-500-s.jpg

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

Terapixel Oct 22, 2003 8:49 AM

Re. reverse mounting
 
Thanks again Shene, Richard. Thanks for the A40 pics Richard, I have a good idea of what to expect now. You may already have answed this question and it probably is a stupid one, but, is it possible to reverse mount a lens to make it a telephoto lens?

Mike_PEAT Oct 22, 2003 3:26 PM

Re: Re. reverse mounting
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Terapixel
is it possible to reverse mount a lens to make it a telephoto lens?

No, because the depth of field (the distance in front of and behind the subject that is in focus) is very narrow or tight. You can see on some of the above pictures where the top surface of the coin is in focus, but just a few millimeters below is out of focus. That is quite common in closeup photography...you might take a picture of a flower where the centre is sharp, but the outer rim of the flower is soft, or out of focus.

To see a variety of lenses, check out http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/egindex.htm where you can select various camera models and see examples of the lenses mounted on the camera, and from there see actual pictures taken with that camera/lens combination and compare them with the bare camera.

djb Oct 23, 2003 6:16 PM

other than a physical test, does anyone know how to calculate minimum focus distance and magnification of a a reversed lens?
i just ordered a 55mm - 55mm ring to reverse my 50mm f/1.4 lens to my fuji s602z. i also have a 200mm f/2.8 canon lens to try also.

dennis

shene Oct 23, 2003 6:41 PM

Re: Re. reverse mounting
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Terapixel
You may already have answed this question and it probably is a stupid one, but, is it possible to reverse mount a lens to make it a telephoto lens?

I indeed answered your question; however, the answer is hidden in the explanation. If you only wish to know the answer, it is NO. Otherwise, please continue. :wink:

The power of a lens of focal length F measured in millimeter is 1000/F in the unit of diopter. Thus, a 50mm lens has a power of 1000/50=200 diopter, written as +20. A 1000mm lens has a diopter of +1. This diopter value is exactly the same as the number marked on a close-up lens. On the other hand, given a diopter value D, the focal length of the lens is simply 1000/D. Thus, a close-up lens of diopter +3 has a focal length of 1000/3=333mm. Since a lens is reversible meaning light rays can enter the lens in either direction, the power value does not change even the lens is reversed. The power of a lens indicates the "strength" of bending/refracting the incoming light.

When two lenses are putting together very closely, the combo has a diopter value very close to the sum of the individual diopter values. This is the reason that many close-up books would tell you that putting two close-up lenses of diopters +a and +b together would yield a close-up lens of diopter +(a+b). Thus, if the on-camera lens has focal length 50mm and a +4 close-up lens is used, the diopter of the combo is 4+(1000/50)=24. Thus, the combo has a diopter of +24.

Once we know the diopter of the combo, we certainly can compute its focal length. In the above example, the combo has a diopter +24, its focal length is 1000/24=41.7mm, which is shorter than the focal length of the camera lens (i.e., 50mm). Since a +4 close-up lens has a focal length of 1000/4=250mm, the focal length of the combo (i.e., 41.7mm) is also shorter than that of the close-up lens. But, is this always true? The answer is YES.

Let the focal lengths of the camera lens and the attached lens (e.g., a close-up lens or a reversed SLR lens) be F1 and F2, respectively. Then, the camera and the attached lenses have diopters 1000/F1 and 1000/F2, respectively, and the combo will have a diopter of (1000/F1 + 1000/F2). Its focal length is 1000/(1000/F1 + 1000/F2), which is equal to (F1*F2)/(F1+F2). Since (F1*F2)/(F1+F2) < F1 (and F2, too), we learn that the combo always has a shorter focal length than those of the camera lens and the attached lens. Consequently, reverse mounting a SLR lens only makes the combined focal length shorter, and the combo can never be a telephoto lens!

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

shene Oct 23, 2003 6:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djb
other than a physical test, does anyone know how to calculate minimum focus distance and magnification of a a reversed lens?

It is very difficult to calculate the minimum focusing distance because there are too many factors involved. In general, it is very close to and maybe slightly larger than the distance from the rear element to the focal plane. The focusing ring of the reversed lens may help, but not by much.

The magnification, as mentioned in my first post, is computed as Y/X, where Y is the on-camera lens focal length (the real one rather than its 35mm equivalent) and X is the focal length of the reversed lens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djb
i just ordered a 55mm - 55mm ring to reverse my 50mm f/1.4 lens to my fuji s602z. i also have a 200mm f/2.8 canon lens to try also.

You might want to stop down your 50mm F1.4 a little. But, your 200 F2.8 may have a large thread and "see" too much. Thus, vignetting may be a problem. If you have a smaller aperture 200mm Canon (e.g., F4), it may have a 55mm thread. Then ,you will have a 200/50=4X lens. I used Nikon's manual 200mm F4 with Nikon 50mm F1.8 to get 4X and Nikon 24mm F2.8 to get 8X. Results are really good.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

djb Oct 23, 2003 6:55 PM

thanx shene!!!

dennis

shene Oct 27, 2003 1:36 AM

Re: Reverse mounting ?
 
Here are more examples. I forgot to set the white balance mode correctly, and, as a result, white balance is not right. However, it does not matter because what I really want to show is the magnification. The camera used was a Nikon D100.

The following was taken using Nikon's AFD 60mm F2.8 micro. This is a reference shot.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...mm-micro-s.jpg

My favorite reverse mounting configuration is the old Nikon MF 200mm F4. This lens is excellent even shooting wide open at F4. The following shows a AFD 50mm F1.8 reverse-mounted on the MF 200mm F4.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...0mm-50mm-s.jpg

This one was shot with the above setup. In theory, the magnification is 200/50=4X.
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...unt/50mm-s.jpg

This one was shot by reverse mount a AFD 24mm F2.8 on the MF 200mm F4. Now, the magnification is 200/24=8.3X!
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/FORUM/R...unt/24mm-s.jpg

Note that since the dollar bill was not treated properly, it is not completely flat and some edge/corner blur is unavoidable. With a magnification as high as 4X and 8X, the DOF is so shallow. Sometimes, 1 millimeter is a big difference.

Hope the above illustrate the reverse mounting technique and magnification well.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

MartinCZ Nov 26, 2003 7:49 AM

I finally tried it too...
 
Recently I bought a nice used Oly 2100 UZI and started to explore it's features, which are really amazing but I always look for info and accessories to expand them to new dimensions.
First I decided to improve the close-up capabilities. Although this topis is mostly Nikon (and short zoom camera) related, it helped me much - thanks Shene and others. However there are still some problems and questions to ask.
So first I bought a Rowi low-end +4 close-up lens. In general the results are something about what I wanted to achieve concerning magnification but the imeage quality suffers. Most of the picture is soft, worst by the edges. Moreover there is too much red and blue aberation, again most in the border.
My first question is: can this be due to a poor quality of the lens or is it a light vigneting? There is no black/gray corner, just softness. The lens is 49 mm, same as the UZI's filter thread. I removed the Skylight filter (used for lens protection) before attaching this lens.
Should I generally look for a bigger diameter lens or simply a better quality lens??? No need for a step-up ring would be convenient.

Second step was reverse mounting of a Russian 2/55 SLR lens. Use of a reversing ring which was manufactured by a local photo retailer was a breeze and the results are satisfactory. The magnification is extreme as I can shoot an area of about 5x3,75 mm, quite matching the Sheenes formula, where Magnification=70/55=1,27 and UZI's CCD is 6,4x4,8 mm.
Again there are a few problems:
1) Slight vigneting; againg the thread of the SLR lens is 49, no step up; would a higher aperture help? Especially when I zoom out a bit to reduce the magnification, vigneting starts to make results "worse usable".
2) Very very low DOF; yes I knew this would be a problem but many results of shooting 1:1 (or so) posted on the net seem to me of somewhat deeper focus. Any suggestions?

Any general suggestions about using UZI as microscope? :wink:

I wanted to post samples but I don't have them yet hosted on the net and it seems it's not possible to embedd them directly to the post. I'll try to add them later.
Thanks, Martin[/img]

MartinCZ Nov 26, 2003 7:52 AM

I finally tried it too...
 
Recently I bought a nice used Oly 2100 UZI and started to explore it's features, which are really amazing but I always look for info and accessories to expand them to new dimensions.
First I decided to improve the close-up capabilities. Although this topis is mostly Nikon (and short zoom camera) related, it helped me much - thanks Shene and others. However there are still some problems and questions to ask.
So first I bought a Rowi low-end +4 close-up lens. In general the results are something about what I wanted to achieve concerning magnification but the imeage quality suffers. Most of the picture is soft, worst by the edges. Moreover there is too much red and blue aberation, again most in the border.
My first question is: can this be due to a poor quality of the lens or is it a light vigneting? There is no black/gray corner, just softness. The lens is 49 mm, same as the UZI's filter thread. I removed the Skylight filter (used for lens protection) before attaching this lens.
Should I generally look for a bigger diameter lens or simply a better quality lens??? No need for a step-up ring would be convenient.

Second step was reverse mounting of a Russian 2/55 SLR lens. Use of a reversing ring which was manufactured by a local photo retailer was a breeze and the results are satisfactory. The magnification is extreme as I can shoot an area of about 5x3,75 mm, quite matching the Sheenes formula, where Magnification=70/55=1,27 and UZI's CCD is 6,4x4,8 mm.
Again there are a few problems:
1) Slight vigneting; againg the thread of the SLR lens is 49, no step up; would a higher aperture help? Especially when I zoom out a bit to reduce the magnification, vigneting starts to make results "worse usable".
2) Very very low DOF; yes I knew this would be a problem but many results of shooting 1:1 (or so) posted on the net seem to me of somewhat deeper focus. Any suggestions?

Any general suggestions about using UZI as microscope? :wink:

I wanted to post samples but I don't have them yet hosted on the net and it seems it's not possible to embedd them directly to the post. I'll try to add them later.
Thanks, Martin[/img]

shene Nov 26, 2003 10:01 PM

Re: I finally tried it too...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MartinCZ
So first I bought a Rowi low-end +4 close-up lens. In general the results are something about what I wanted to achieve concerning magnification but the imeage quality suffers. Most of the picture is soft, worst by the edges. Moreover there is too much red and blue aberation, again most in the border. My first question is: can this be due to a poor quality of the lens or is it a light vigneting?

This is likely due to BOTH. The +4 close-up is perhaps a single element one which always suffers from chromatic aberration. Then, its poor quality will be magnified my the camera lens and hence becomes worse. If you do not use the longest zoom end, the situation may improve somewhat but not by very much. To get better results, you could try some doublet close-up lenses. Of course, they are more expensive. Nikon and Pentex both offer good quality doublet close-up lenses. The thread size may not be 49mm, and, hence, a step-up ring may be needed. Since most zoom lenses are soft to very soft at their longer end (in fact, the longer the zoom the worse the quality at the longest end), I would not suggest to use the longest end for close-up, although in doing so you will get higher magnification. Use the lower 3/4 or 2/3.


Quote:

Originally Posted by MartinCZ
Should I generally look for a bigger diameter lens or simply a better quality lens??? No need for a step-up ring would be convenient.

Larger diameter close-up lenses may not help with image quality. Good quality doublet close-up lenses do. Minolta offer some 49mm close-up lenses; but, I don't know about their quality. Nikon have two sets, one for 52mm and the other 62mm. The 52mm ones are very good; but, they need a 49-52mm step-up ring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MartinCZ
1) Slight vigneting; againg the thread of the SLR lens is 49, no step up; would a higher aperture help? Especially when I zoom out a bit to reduce the magnification, vigneting starts to make results "worse usable".

The reversed lens should be wide open for reducing vignetting. But, closing down the aperture of the camera lens may cause light fall-off because in doing so some light near the corners will be blocked. If a wide open lens still causes vignetting, it could be (1) that lens aperture is not large enough, (2) the gap between the first elements of both lenses are to wide so that the camera lens "sees" too much, and/or (3) the front element of the reversed lens is deeply recessed which creates a situation like (2). Zooming out cannot reduce vignetting but create more because the camera lens can "see" more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MartinCZ
2) Very very low DOF; yes I knew this would be a problem but many results of shooting 1:1 (or so) posted on the net seem to me of somewhat deeper focus. Any suggestions?

The camera lens may have a very small aperture, the subject being photographed may be positioned carefully so that most important areas are all in focus, some of the not-so-out-of-focus areas may be sharpened locally, and/or better equipment may be used.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

MartinCZ Nov 27, 2003 3:13 AM

Thanks Shene, very comprehensive.
Yesterday I tried to reverse mount another 50mm lens, F1.8 which even seemed to have its front element less recessed but the vigneting was even more significant. I proofed that only trying thigs can optimize the setup, not reading specs...

MartinCZ Nov 27, 2003 3:31 AM

Thanks Shene, very comprehensive.
Yesterday I tried to reverse mount another 50mm lens, F1.8 which even seemed to have its front element less recessed but the vigneting was even more significant. I proofed that only trying thigs can optimize the setup, not reading specs...

shene Nov 28, 2003 1:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MartinCZ
Yesterday I tried to reverse mount another 50mm lens, F1.8 which even seemed to have its front element less recessed but the vigneting was even more significant. I proofed that only trying thigs can optimize the setup, not reading specs...

This is very true in digital photography with consumer level digital cameras. Cross-platform application has been a challenge to computer systems, and using A brand's stuffs on B brand's cameras is even worse because we don't know if their specifications match precisely (many details are left out). Other people's experience and successful experiments, and one's own testings do make a difference.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500 User Guide

MartinCZ Dec 2, 2003 5:30 AM

Achromatic lens
 
Shene, following your advice I decided to get one of those expensive dublet achromatic lenses, probably Hoya as it is the only one I can find here in Czech Republic.
I still don't know what strength of the lens would be best for me, I'm deciding between +4D and +5D. I want to get magnification which fills the frame (Oly 2100 has 6.5x4.8mm CCD) with area of 20 mm wide at max zoom.
I suppose both of them are similarly high quality. The stronger one would allow me to get the same magnification at lower than full zoom which could avoid softness of the long zoom as you wrote. On the other hand, how "wide" can I go with this type of add-on lens to get less magnification? Can there be any problem other than possible vigneting?
Off course I'll test it in the shop but I want to be prepared and know what to test :wink:
Thanks, Martin

daredevil80 Jan 1, 2004 9:39 PM

Thanks for your insights into the hardware side of digital macrowork. I am one of many people that were saved alot of frustration acquiring equipment peicemeal by your posts.

shene Jan 24, 2004 1:27 AM

I have added some reverse mount information for the Coolpix 4500 here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=7383049

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500/5700 User Guide


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 AM.