Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Subject: Re: [OM] 200/f4 + Shutter Shudders: (was "200mm F4 / F5 vs

Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [OM] 200/f4 + Shutter Shudders: (was "200mm F4 / F5 vs. 65/200mm F4)
From: Joel Wilcox <jowilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 11:27:53 -0500
At 06:13 AM 5/6/99 -0400, Chuck you wrote:
>I own an OM-1 and the 200mm/f4 is one of my favorite lenses. 
>Consequently I've been following this shutter shudders thread pretty
>closely.  Excuse me if I missed it but I don't recall that there has
>been any data yet that would implicate the OM-1 with a lens other than
>the 200mm/f4.
>

Hi Chuck,

I don't know what Richard may be working on, but I couldn't reliably attach
a laser pointer to a short lens (85/f2 or 50/f3.5, or to a Nikkor 55/f2.8
macro on an FM2).  My pointer tapes solidly to the 200/f4.

>As I recall, Joel's tests also showed that, despite the good performance
>of the OM-2s with the 200mm/f4 alone, it didn't do so well if it had a
>winder attached.  That causes me to strongly suspect that what we're
>seeing is a resonance effect.  If that's the case the problem might go
>away or be diminished with any other lens.  This also leads me to wonder
>whether this phenomenon might occur on other bodies using different
>lenses.
>

Possible.  Hope not.  

>As I was closing this note the Heisenberg principle suddenly popped into
>my churning brain and caused me to wonder... what if the cause of the
>resonance was the addition of a laser pointer :)
>

Let's see, Heisenberg was talking about sub-atomic physics, right? <g> 

Joel

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz