Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Fujifilm

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 16, 2007, 9:54 AM   #1
Member
 
JH2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 84
Default


I have recieved confirmation from Bernie at NextPhoto that the 55mm Thread Adapter for Olympus SP-550UZ (NextPhoto Part# NP55055) would screw onto a Fujifilm FinePix S8000fd in a similar manner.

"Yes the adaptor does screw onto the Fuji.
There is some vignetting at the wide angle end of the zoom.
"



:!: Please Note: I only asked if it would screw on properly.
I did not ask for some guarantee that the adapter will work beyond simply attaching.

Still Bernie was kind enough to let me know about the vignetting at the wide angle end of the zoom.

http://www.nextphoto.net/SP550.htm#


I forgot to ask if it'll allow the S8000 to be turned off while attached.
Eitherway I'll be ordering one pretty shortly.

Jason
JH2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 16, 2007, 10:04 AM   #2
Member
 
Barry in Dallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 77
Default

If it works, i'll get one with my rebate money (see my other topic)
Barry in Dallas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2007, 9:19 AM   #3
Member
 
JH2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 84
Default

Here's a quick update on the adapter.

Ref: "There is some vignetting at the wide angle end of the zoom."
"Actually both the 52 and 55 vignette."
"I believe that it is the inside diameter of the adaptor that cause the vignetting."

"Yes, the camera can be turned off with the adaptor in place."


Thanks to Bernie at NextPhoto, for all the information.

JH2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2007, 9:24 AM   #4
Member
 
Barry in Dallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 77
Default

Which preference do you see in which model to get? 52mm or 55mm adapter? Any difference in picture quality according to Bernie (besides vignetting)?
Barry in Dallas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2007, 9:32 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 161
Default

Unfortunately, if there is vignetting, I can't see that this is an acceptable solution. I'd rather take my chances with the naked lens.
monsieurms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2007, 9:36 AM   #6
Member
 
JH2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 84
Default

I'd asked him if "the 52mm adaptor have more vignetting then the 55mm"?
And from his response it appears they are about the same.
Which is makes sense if it's caused by the inner diameter of the adapter ring itself.

I may have a way to test my theory on adapter's ID causing vignetting, but it'll take some time.

(Plus; I'm installing the new HDD today and ghosting the old one over, etc...)
JH2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2007, 9:38 AM   #7
Member
 
Barry in Dallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 77
Default

You might have a point however if it's only around the far edges of the frame and you compose your subject just right, cropping the vignetting out before printing may not be such a hassle, if it distorts the even the slightest bit the rest of the picture, I'll save my money.
Barry in Dallas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2007, 9:40 AM   #8
Member
 
Barry in Dallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 77
Default

JH2007 wrote:
Quote:
I'd asked him if "the 52mm adaptor have more vignetting then the 55mm"?
And from his response it appears they are about the same.
Which is makes sense if it's caused by the inner diameter of the adapter ring itself.

I may have a way to test my theory on adapter's ID causing vignetting, but it'll take some time.

(Plus; I'm installing the new HDD today and ghosting the old one over, etc...)
I hope you post some "before and after" pics
Barry in Dallas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2007, 9:42 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 161
Default

Barry in Dallas wrote:
Quote:
You might have a point however if it's only around the far edges of the frame and you compose your subject just right, cropping the vignetting out before printing may not be such a hassle, if it distorts the even the slightest bit the rest of the picture, I'll save my money.
The wide angle is more important to me than the telephoto. If anything, there are many times when it is not wide enough. Sure, you COULD work around it, but losing part of the picture--when in reality I want an even wider angle many times--is not what I want to see. It basically will mean that it is a 35mm camera instead of a 28, or whatever. If it had been a 35mm advertised in the first place, I wouldn't have bought it. Not having a 28mm start would have been a deal breaker for me. I love the OPTION of the long telephoto, but the wide angle is much more useful for me much of the time.
monsieurms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2007, 9:31 PM   #10
Member
 
JH2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 84
Default

I'll have to buy the adapter, because there is too much that I don't know. :?
The ID (inner Diameter) and also, the Length of ID tube (from the Innerside corner to innerside bevelled corner).
My tests are pretty boring, but I now understand more of physics involved.:?

Basically if the adapter has a thin inner diameter, slightly bevelled and is kept as short as possible, then very little or no vignetting appears at the corners of photos.

:roll: Only by actually buying the adapter, slapping the camera on the tripod and taking a few sample shots can I tell anyone how much the adapter may vignetting, if at all.

JH2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:32 AM.