Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Kodak (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/kodak-24/)
-   -   Z712IS filter accessories (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/kodak-24/z712is-filter-accessories-133025/)

Doug1937 Nov 28, 2007 7:15 PM

I read that the Z712IS can use 55mm filters and rings. I have some 62mm filters left over from a previous camera, so I bought a 55-62mm step up ring for this purpose. However, I noticed 1) that the step up ring didn't fit threads, and 2) even if it had, the zoom lens moves forward when the camera is powered on. So simply connecting a filter to the threads won't work...some kind of extension tube is required.

I noticed that the Kodak website lists a lens adapter, 49mm to 55mm, for the Z712. Does this mean that the Z712IS lens is actually 49mm, and that I need this adapter (which looks like what I'd describe as an extension tube)?


Thanks,

Doug

ac.smith Nov 29, 2007 9:50 AM

Short answer - yes, you need the tube. The tube serves two purposes: 1) Converts 49mm to 55mm which is thread size of the S-K 1.4 tcon and the Oly 1.7 tcon and 2) Moves the filter/aux lens far enough away that the camera lens will not hit the add-on when the camera lens is in max telephoto position thereby avoiding jamming the zoom motor.

As the result of 2) the adapter tube will cause vignetting at any focal length less than about 80mm equiv. so you really can't leave the adapter in place at all times. Raynox, I think, makes an adapter tube the same length as the Kodak tube but is a 49mm to 58mm thread conversion. The larger thread size may reduce the vignetting slightly but I have also read of it causing additional flare.

The moving front element of 12x S-K lens necessitating the adapter tube is also why there are no WA aux lenses for the Z*12 series cameras.

Doug1937 Dec 4, 2007 10:58 PM

I ended up buying a metal 49mm to 58mm tube off eBay...it works great, and there's only a tiny bit of vignetting, which I can eliminate by zooming slightly. I haven't used it enough to notice any flare, but I'll keep that in mind.

I have some 62mm filters from a broken camera, and it's great to be able to use these again (with the addition of a 58mm to 62mm step up ring).

Speaking of filters, with the availability of programs like Photoshop, does it make any sense to buy filters for a digital camera? I love accessorizing my cam, but wonder if I'm wasting my money buying hardware that has been made obsolete by software.

Ideas?

ac.smith Dec 5, 2007 6:02 PM

My opinion only but I'm inclined to think camera filters are more effective than software solutions. Software can't make up for what isn't there, for example details that are hidden by glare can't be added back in but they can be captured many times by using a polarizing filter.

I'm not much of a filter user but the only two that would interest me would be a polarizing filter and split neutral density filter.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:04 AM.