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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 20, 2005, 10:15 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

pschooley1 wrote:
Quote:
I thought the Phayee had 72mm threads on the second tube.It does.Is the Phayee shorter then the original Pana tube?Yes
You lost me going around the turn. This is my understanding. The adapter portion of the Phayee is shorter then the Panasonic. The "hood" connects to the outside of the adapter giving access to the 62mm filters without hood removal. Why is it necessary to set the polarizer with the hood off? The 72mm threads are on the end of the hood and have the same internal gap problem. You know there are pluses and minus to everything. If you had a Hama 62mm Hama on the polarizer you could rotate the hood.
LoveLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2005, 8:42 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
pschooley1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 207
Default

I was speaking about my setup - which includes a 62mm polarizer, not a 72mm. The hood sec tion of the Phayee is shorter than the Panasonic. There is still a larger space between the FZ20 lens and a 72mm filter attached to the Phayee 72mm hood than if one has a 62mm filter attached to the Phaye camera body adapter. The smaller the gap between filter and lens the better; that is why I use only 62mm filters on my Phayee. To adjust a 62mm polarizing filter on the Phayee camera body piece requires the hood to be removed. There is not enough clearance between the hood and filter rim to turn the filter without smudging up the filter with your fingers.If you were applying a 72mm polarizer to the Phayee hood piece you would not have this problem adjusting the filter but you do have the increase in reflections between the filter and lens that occurs with a large gap between the lens & filter.
pschooley1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2005, 8:56 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

pschooley1 wrote:
Quote:
I was speaking about my setup - which includes a 62mm polarizer, not a 72mm. The hood sec tion of the Phayee is shorter than the Panasonic. There is still a larger space between the FZ20 lens and a 72mm filter attached to the Phayee 72mm hood than if one has a 62mm filter attached to the Phaye camera body adapter. The smaller the gap between filter and lens the better; that is why I use only 62mm filters on my Phayee. To adjust a 62mm polarizing filter on the Phayee camera body piece requires the hood to be removed. There is not enough clearance between the hood and filter rim to turn the filter without smudging up the filter with your fingers.If you were applying a 72mm polarizer to the Phayee hood piece you would not have this problem adjusting the filter but you do have the increase in reflections between the filter and lens that occurs with a large gap between the lens & filter.
Thank you for this vital information. Yes I am cooking up something very special.
LoveLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2005, 9:24 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Hiroshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,749
Default

LoveLife wrote:
Quote:
pschooley1 wrote:
Quote:
I thought the Phayee had 72mm threads on the second tube.It does.Is the Phayee shorter then the original Pana tube?Yes
You lost me going around the turn. This is my understanding. The adapter portion of the Phayee is shorter then the Panasonic. The "hood" connects to the outside of the adapter giving access to the 62mm filters without hood removal. Why is it necessary to set the polarizer with the hood off? The 72mm threads are on the end of the hood and have the same internal gap problem. You know there are pluses and minus to everything. If you had a Hama 62mm Hama on the polarizer you could rotate the hood.
gellis,

The Phayee adapter in its entirety (both sections together) is 44mm long. The Panasonic plastic adapter is 48mm long. Not much difference for potential flareups except for the fact that we're not talking about a clear UV filter, but a tinted polarizer. The dark polarizer greatly reduces the chances of flare that can occurinside because ofthe distance between the Leica anda 72mm UV filter. My opinion is that you don't need to worry about using your 72mm polarizer at the end of the Phayee. It should work just fine. Since you already have it, experiment with it and take some critical shots. JM2C

Hiroshi

Hiroshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2005, 10:32 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

Hiroshi wrote:
Quote:
LoveLife wrote:
Quote:
pschooley1 wrote:
Quote:
I thought the Phayee had 72mm threads on the second tube.It does.Is the Phayee shorter then the original Pana tube?Yes
You lost me going around the turn. This is my understanding. The adapter portion of the Phayee is shorter then the Panasonic. The "hood" connects to the outside of the adapter giving access to the 62mm filters without hood removal. Why is it necessary to set the polarizer with the hood off? The 72mm threads are on the end of the hood and have the same internal gap problem. You know there are pluses and minus to everything. If you had a Hama 62mm Hama on the polarizer you could rotate the hood.
gellis,

The Phayee adapter in its entirety (both sections together) is 44mm long. The Panasonic plastic adapter is 48mm long. Not much difference for potential flareups except for the fact that we're not talking about a clear UV filter, but a tinted polarizer. The dark polarizer greatly reduces the chances of flare that can occurinside because ofthe distance between the Leica anda 72mm UV filter. My opinion is that you don't need to worry about using your 72mm polarizer at the end of the Phayee. It should work just fine. Since you already have it, experiment with it and take some critical shots. JM2C

Hiroshi
Interesting numbers but they do not prove anything. I think these numbers are more relevant.

What is the depth of the Phayee hood? [Outside measurement on table minus 2.43mm] A Hama hood is 51mm deep.

What is the distance between the extended front barrel and the outside surface of the adapter? 3mm-4mm or 5mm.



These measurements dictate performance.


LoveLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2005, 10:57 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Hiroshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,749
Default

LoveLife wrote:
Quote:
Hiroshi wrote:
Quote:
LoveLife wrote:
Quote:
pschooley1 wrote:
Quote:
I thought the Phayee had 72mm threads on the second tube.It does.Is the Phayee shorter then the original Pana tube?Yes
You lost me going around the turn. This is my understanding. The adapter portion of the Phayee is shorter then the Panasonic. The "hood" connects to the outside of the adapter giving access to the 62mm filters without hood removal. Why is it necessary to set the polarizer with the hood off? The 72mm threads are on the end of the hood and have the same internal gap problem. You know there are pluses and minus to everything. If you had a Hama 62mm Hama on the polarizer you could rotate the hood.
gellis,

The Phayee adapter in its entirety (both sections together) is 44mm long. The Panasonic plastic adapter is 48mm long. Not much difference for potential flareups except for the fact that we're not talking about a clear UV filter, but a tinted polarizer. The dark polarizer greatly reduces the chances of flare that can occurinside because ofthe distance between the Leica anda 72mm UV filter. My opinion is that you don't need to worry about using your 72mm polarizer at the end of the Phayee. It should work just fine. Since you already have it, experiment with it and take some critical shots. JM2C

Hiroshi
Interesting numbers but they do not prove anything. I think these numbers are more relevant.

What is the depth of the Phayee hood? [Outside measurement on table minus 2.43mm] A Hama hood is 51mm deep.

What is the distance between the extended front barrel and the outside surface of the adapter? 3mm-4mm or 5mm.



These measurements dictate performance.

LoveLife,

Are you saying that the fact that gellis is talking about a "polarizer" and not a UV filter is irrelevant? A polarizer has 2 elements, both are tinted, in additionthe polarizing effect darkens things even more(average loss of light is 1-1 1/2 F stop.) isn't that the same effect that happens between polarized sunglasses and the human eye? Isn't that enough to prevent flare that may occur between the Leica lens and the polarizer??? Aren't we splitting hairs here? I understand the benefits of placing the UV filter closer to the Leica lens than what the original Panasonic setup allows, but to methe inherent characteristics of a polarizer changes the dynamics of the discussion. JM2C

Hiroshi
Hiroshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2005, 11:03 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

I am not talking about filters at all. I am commenting on the Phayee adapter dimensions stated above.
LoveLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2005, 11:21 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Hiroshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,749
Default

gellis1 wrote:
Quote:
Bought a 72mm polarizer for my FZ20 before I researched the camera, like so many others!I have a Phayee adapter coming in the mail with a 62mm UV.Has anybody tried the 72mm polarizer on the Phayee minus the UV filter?Does it work OK?I would like to know so I can either sell or keep the B+W polarizer.

And I'm responding to Gellis' original question (above). He's simplyasking if he can use a 72MM polarizer on the outer 72mm section of the Phayee with or without having to remove the 62mm UV filter and not suffer adverse effects. I say YES. You can leave the 62mm UV on the 62mm section and screw the polarizer in front of it on the 72mm section and dial the polarizer to your heats desire. Thats all.

Hiroshi
Hiroshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 21, 2005, 12:30 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
pschooley1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 207
Default

Yes, that was the post and the thread has moved a bit off the original topic. Try your filter on your Phayee - all of the discussion may be of little importance if you are happy with your setup.
pschooley1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 21, 2005, 4:25 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 214
Default

Wow,Thanks guys that was interesting!
Now that we have that settled I am going to try the 72mm since I already have one.
If I could ask another question.The polarizer I have is a circular,will a linear do a better job?
gellis1 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 3:55 AM.