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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 26, 2005, 10:39 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 242
Default

A ring with two male 62mm threads on both sides is called a Macro Ring Adapter and are readily available. I bought several sizes to adapt some om my older lensed to the Phayee lens adapter. Used 62 to xx step down CONVERSION rings to do the job: FZ20>Phayee lens adapter>62mm step down CONVERSION ring to XXXmm>macro adapter ring> lens with female threads.

BTW Conversion rings are much thiner and do notspace the lens outas much as regular step down rings.

STAN
stnkline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 4:34 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

Hiroshi wrote:
Quote:
squirl033 wrote:
Quote:
thanks, Hiroshi... i remembered you'd made one out of PVC pipe. does that add much to the weight? if the TCON-14B is that heavy, is there a risk that the Phayee threads won't be sturdy enough?

i've been looking for a Contax # 5 hood, but they do seem in short supply. if i can find one, would that be the best solution? if not, perhaps that PVC pipe trick migh tbe my best bet!

Quote:
The PVC connector is not that heavy. I've used it and it seems to be fine. The Phayee is very strong and I've not had a problem with it.

I should have the Tamron hood in about 3 days. I'll let you know if it works out. I like it because it's very deep and at $25.00 it doesn't break the bank.

Contax is out of business. All their inventory of the #5 hood is gone. It's doubtfulthat there are any lefton themarket.
I am making a hood to fit the TCON14B, it will utilize the Olympus cap when on the camera and willstow in the pouch with the lens inside. 6 weeks.


LoveLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 4:59 PM   #23
Member
 
imaruke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 97
Default

stnkline wrote:
Quote:
A ring with two male 62mm threads on both sides is called a Macro Ring Adapter and are readily available. I bought several sizes to adapt some om my older lensed to the Phayee lens adapter. Used 62 to xx step down CONVERSION rings to do the job: FZ20>Phayee lens adapter>62mm step down CONVERSION ring to XXXmm>macro adapter ring> lens with female threads.

BTW Conversion rings are much thiner and do notspace the lens outas much as regular step down rings.

STAN
Thanks for the info. stnkline. It sounds like this is the partsquirl033 and jchadare looking forto attach the tcon to the polarizer.
imaruke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:28 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
squirl033's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,720
Default

the TCON-14B will attach directly to the polarizer or any other filter without any added rings. I'vetried it, and it fits perfectly.my main concerns regarding that were A) does putting the TCON in front of the polarizer affect the image quality or change the effect of the polarizer in any way (i tried it last Saturday on some shots of Mt. St. Helens, and it didn't seem to affect the polarizer's performance), and B) are the threads on most filters strong enough to support the weight of the TCON-14B? i suspec they are, as long as you support the lens and don't jar the camera with the TCON attached...
squirl033 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:37 PM   #25
jcr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 152
Default

Something is not right around here... :?no macro ring or other needed...Or I just don't understaind what you are talking about....

Just attach a good polarizer with front threadson phayee, and Tcon 14B on top of it, Tcon 14b has male threads, polarizer has female front threads, and male on back to attach to phayee.

The question is, is there a pratical (noticed on final work, by a normal human eye...) diference when we put the polarizer 62mm between the phayee and the Tcon, or we must spend a huge amount of money just to purchase a 86mm polarizer to put on top of tcon...

...and I already purchased a 86mm UV filter to protect the Tcon...and thinking on buying a Wide angle with a 105mmm, going with this again.... woulld have to buy three polarizers...can we get a good work just with a good polarizer62mm to use direct on phayee, and stack the tcon on top when needed or Wcon ?? this is THE question....:?
jcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:52 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
squirl033's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,720
Default

as i mentioned, i put the TCON on in front of my 62mm polarizer over the weekend and took some shots, and it didn't seem to matter that the polarizer was between the TCON and the camera... it appeared to function normally. i don't think you'd notice the difference on a print, and i certainly don't intend to spend absurd amounts of money on an 86mm polarizer if i don't have to! i haven't yet purchased a UV filter to fit the TCON, and i'm not sure i plan to... that'sjust adding one more piece of glass, and with my 62mm UV filter, the polarizer,and the TCON, i'm already stacking more glass than i probably should.
squirl033 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 7:06 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

squirl033 wrote:
Quote:
as i mentioned, i put the TCON on in front of my 62mm polarizer over the weekend and took some shots, and it didn't seem to matter that the polarizer was between the TCON and the camera... it appeared to function normally. i don't think you'd notice the difference on a print, and i certainly don't intend to spend absurd amounts of money on an 86mm polarizer if i don't have to! i haven't yet purchased a UV filter to fit the TCON, and i'm not sure i plan to... that'sjust adding one more piece of glass, and with my 62mm UV filter, the polarizer,and the TCON, i'm already stacking more glass than i probably should.
Is $82.00 an absurd amount for a LP? Is $44.63 an absurd amount for a UV? I do not think so I would sell them with the TCON14B when the time came.
LoveLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 7:15 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
squirl033's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,720
Default

LoveLife wrote:
Quote:
squirl033 wrote:
Quote:
as i mentioned, i put the TCON on in front of my 62mm polarizer over the weekend and took some shots, and it didn't seem to matter that the polarizer was between the TCON and the camera... it appeared to function normally. i don't think you'd notice the difference on a print, and i certainly don't intend to spend absurd amounts of money on an 86mm polarizer if i don't have to! i haven't yet purchased a UV filter to fit the TCON, and i'm not sure i plan to... that'sjust adding one more piece of glass, and with my 62mm UV filter, the polarizer,and the TCON, i'm already stacking more glass than i probably should.
Is $82.00 an absurd amount for a LP? Is $44.63 an absurd amount for a UV? I do not think so I would sell them with the TCON14B when the time came.
depends on your point of view. why spend $82 on an 86mm polarizer if you don't need one? that was my point, and it would be kinda silly... as fora UV filter for the TCON, i'm still undecided on whether i need that one or not, but i'll probably break down and get one anyway, even if for no other reason than to keep fingerprints and dust off the TCON glass...


squirl033 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 7:25 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

squirl033 wrote:
Quote:
LoveLife wrote:
Quote:
squirl033 wrote:
Quote:
as i mentioned, i put the TCON on in front of my 62mm polarizer over the weekend and took some shots, and it didn't seem to matter that the polarizer was between the TCON and the camera... it appeared to function normally. i don't think you'd notice the difference on a print, and i certainly don't intend to spend absurd amounts of money on an 86mm polarizer if i don't have to! i haven't yet purchased a UV filter to fit the TCON, and i'm not sure i plan to... that'sjust adding one more piece of glass, and with my 62mm UV filter, the polarizer,and the TCON, i'm already stacking more glass than i probably should.
Is $82.00 an absurd amount for a LP? Is $44.63 an absurd amount for a UV? I do not think so I would sell them with the TCON14B when the time came.
depends on your point of view. why spend $82 on an 86mm polarizer if you don't need one? that was my point, and it would be kinda silly... as fora UV filter for the TCON, i'm still undecided on whether i need that one or not, but i'll probably break down and get one anyway, even if for no other reason than to keep fingerprints and dust off the TCON glass...

I could see doing that with a UV, that is a one-piece construction with a snap ring. The polarizer's two rings bother me a bit. There is nothing wrong with mounting the 86mm filters on smaller filter mounts with a step-up ring. That is what they were originally designed for.
LoveLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2005, 9:00 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
squirl033's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,720
Default

LoveLife wrote:
Quote:
squirl033 wrote:
Quote:
LoveLife wrote:
Quote:
squirl033 wrote:
Quote:
as i mentioned, i put the TCON on in front of my 62mm polarizer over the weekend and took some shots, and it didn't seem to matter that the polarizer was between the TCON and the camera... it appeared to function normally. i don't think you'd notice the difference on a print, and i certainly don't intend to spend absurd amounts of money on an 86mm polarizer if i don't have to! i haven't yet purchased a UV filter to fit the TCON, and i'm not sure i plan to... that'sjust adding one more piece of glass, and with my 62mm UV filter, the polarizer,and the TCON, i'm already stacking more glass than i probably should.
Is $82.00 an absurd amount for a LP? Is $44.63 an absurd amount for a UV? I do not think so I would sell them with the TCON14B when the time came.
depends on your point of view. why spend $82 on an 86mm polarizer if you don't need one? that was my point, and it would be kinda silly... as fora UV filter for the TCON, i'm still undecided on whether i need that one or not, but i'll probably break down and get one anyway, even if for no other reason than to keep fingerprints and dust off the TCON glass...

I could see doing that with a UV, that is a one-piece construction with a snap ring. The polarizer's two rings bother me a bit. There is nothing wrong with mounting the 86mm filters on smaller filter mounts with a step-up ring. That is what they were originally designed for.
yeah, that concerns me a bit too. the TCON is heavy, and i'd rather not spring the polarizer rings out of shape by hanging so much weight on them... for now, though, it'll have to do, since i don't have a spare $100 to drop on an 86mmpolarizer. fortunately, i don't use both the polarizer and theTCON at the same time very often, so it shouldn't be a big issue. andmy polarizer isa good quality one, well made, so it should tolerate the occasionaloverload okay as long asi'm careful...

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"
squirl033 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 12:41 PM.