On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Walt Wayman wrote:
> But...is that REALLY what those mysterious protruberances are for? On the
> 21/2 and even the 50/1.4, yeah, they could keep the rear element from
> coming into contact with whatever surface an idiot or moron might set the
> bare lens on back-end-down. But on other lenses, such as the 65-200/4 or
> the 35-80/2.8, the rear element is recessed far enough that these "horns"
> wouldn't add much, if anything, in the way of protection.
>
> So, they must be there for some purpose. But what else could it be? And,
> no, I really don't think they're antennae for the black helicopters. I
> could be wrong.
I think their main purpose is to protect the rear element, but not from
damage from being placed end down. If you look very carefully, as the lens
is mounted on a body, you'll notice that the "horn(s)" line up with the
bottom of the lens mount flange. The horns are there to protect the rear
element from being damaged by the lens mount if you should happen to slip
while mounting the lens. Only lenses which have the rear element recessed
enough that the lens mount flange can't reach don't have the horns.
-mar
< 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 >
|