Yes, they must be different optically too.
I had a friend doing almost only macro work with his 80mm on a bellows
(shift and tilt, which I own now!) or auto tube, for whom depth
sharpness was very critical. The sharpness layer should not be too
deep, but also not too shallow... He owned a cycle tyre factory, and
actually photographed those tyre surfaces from all different angles
and positions for commercial purposes
Although he could choose he would use the manual type 80mm only - even
on the auto tube! Said he preferred hid not only for its easier
handling, but also for quality of the resultant images.
Frank van Lindert
Utrecht NL.
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002 07:56:43 -0400, "Tom Scales"
<tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I believe they are different optically. The auto version has a big
>protrusion out the back and requires a special cap. That would say, to me,
>that they are different designs.
>
>You did get QUITE a bargain.
>
>Tom
>
>> >$300 if it is the new one, $200 if it is the old one.
>>
>> Wow, so I got mine (manual, but marked "mc") very cheap then. Picked
>> it up in a 2nd hand camera store here in Amsterdam for around $80.
>> They had just priced it down $40 because it had been sitting on their
>> shelves for ages. Looked and felt like new.
>>
>> Are the auto and manual versions any different optically or is it
>> just the aperture mechanism? I could never tell from the
>> cross-section drawings.
>>
>> Ton
>>
>>
>> < 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 >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>< 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 >
< 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 >
|