Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 19, 2005, 6:16 PM   #11
Member
 
hbillsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 49
Default

Good info and thanks, I had planned on ordering the Raynox to use with my Yoshida 55mm metal adapter. I sent Mr. Yoshida an email asking for his dimensions and he replied:

Mr,Bill

Hello. The length of 1055B is produced with 31mm. However, there might be an error margin of about 0.2mm.

So if 33mm is the magic length, I guess I need to look for a 2.5mm step-ring when I go from 55mm to 52mm.
hbillsmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2005, 6:54 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 102
Default

So here's the scoop on adapter lenghts without a step ring:

Raynox Adapter: 29.5 mm
Phayee Adapter: 31 mm
Pamaraal Delkin PD62 Adapter: 30.5 mm, PD58: 31.5mm
marigil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2005, 11:16 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 102
Default

Correction:

The PD62 is actually 30.5mm. My adapter the one I used for testing is a PD58 (had forgotten) and it is 31.5mm, so this is probably not an issue with the PD62.

Sorry for any confusion that this may have caused,

Thanks everyone,
Gilles
marigil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2005, 5:14 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
playlong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 237
Default

marigil wrote:
Quote:
Correction:

The PD62 is actually 30.5mm. My adapter the one I used for testing is a PD58 (had forgotten) and it is 31.5mm, so this is probably not an issue with the PD62.

Sorry for any confusion that this may have caused,

Thanks everyone,
Gilles


Adapter heights:

I know you all are posting accurate exterior information but may a new adapter designer put in his two cents. The exterior adapter height is not the end-all indication of TC to Leica element closeness. The camera end of the adapter is nothing but a trim skirt. It has zero effect on the distance between the TC and the front element, and the adapter would function the same without the skirt. The true measurement is the distance between the internal rear thread stop and the front end of the adapter. The barrel zoom range. The goal is to place the TC optics as close to the front Leica element.
--
Attached Images
 
playlong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2005, 10:49 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
fmoore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,116
Default

Quote:
The goal is to place the TC optics as close to the front Leica element.
Then why did Panasonic design the stock 72mm adapter to place their tele converter ~20mm from the fz20 lens?

Here are two shots with the fz1 and the tcon17. Tripod, IS off, spot on, full 12x zoom, 13 ft distance from subject, cropped to 100%. The first is without a uv filter; the second with a uv filter which puts the tcon17 3mm-4mm further from the fz1 lens than without. I'm using a yoshida 295 adapter on the fz1.

fz1 (without uv filter)+ tcon17 (100%)



fz1 (with uv filter) + tcon17 (100%)



These do show slightly better focus on the non-uv filter shot which could be attrbuted to the uv glass as much as to the increased distance from lens to lens. Nevertheless, there's not that much difference. Not enough for me to be so concernedas to remove the uv filter when using the tcon17 on the fz1. Is the fz20 + tcon17 combination much more sensitve to that lens to lens difference? If so, why?
fmoore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2005, 1:47 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
arrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19
Default

fmoore wrote:
Quote:
Then why did Panasonic design the stock 72mm adapter to place their tele converter ~20mm from the fz20 lens?
I haven't got one but I think you will find that the Panasonic converters attach directly to the camera and not to the adapter.

I am very interested in your findings as I am intending to get a Tcon 17

arrow


arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2005, 1:49 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

arrow......wrong:arrow:
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2005, 4:02 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
arrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19
Default

nooner wrote:
Quote:
arrow......wrong:arrow:
Nooner, I'm sorry if I am wrong but we are talking about Panasonic manufactured converters and it looks that way in the handbook.

arrow


Attached Images
 
arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2005, 8:57 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
fmoore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,116
Default

fmoore wrote:
Quote:
Then why did Panasonic design the stock 72mm adapter to place their tele converter ~20mm from the fz20 lens?
I stand corrected, arrow. I was wondering why the tele would be placed that far away only to find out it isn't. Thanks for clearing that up. I still wonder whether a difference of even 5mm in distance between the camer and tele optics would make a difference.

Fred
fmoore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2005, 12:01 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 102
Default

Hi Fred,

May I suggest that you repeat your test with an object 40 or 50ft away. I've noticed that up to 30ft the images are slightly softer only. But at greater distances your dept of field is dramatically affected. I have pictures that show this but I have no way to post them, can I somehow send them to you and you could post them for me?
The pictures were shot with the tcon17 6mm and 7mm from the centre of the front element of the camera lens,F8, 12x zoom.

Gilles
marigil 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 12:24 AM.