Joshua Lohuis wrote:
> 2. Along with the above problem is the weight of a tripod required for
> steadying the camera in low light situations. How much stability does
> a monopod actually provide? Does it permit exposures of a second or
> more, or is it only to allow a few more stops less than handheld?
In my experience, a monopod only gives you another couple of stops.
It'll stabilise the camera, but in a way that's useful for long lenses
rather than long exposures, if you see what I mean. Monopods are great
when there's not much room, but if you can find room to use a tripod
they're a much better bet.
For very long exposures at night you can probably get away with a
pretty small tripod, even -- sure, it won't be as solid as a big heavy
one, but if you're exposing for many seconds, then the initial rattle
when the shutter goes (because you're using self-timer and mirror lock
up, right?) is less important.
Alternative 2: opaque object in front of the lens, press shutter
release, the camera sits there thinking to itself because there's no
light coming in at all; remove opaque object, camera wakes up and starts
exposing. Again, only works if you're exposing for long enough that the
time it takes to get the thing out of the way isn't important -- at
1/100th of a second you'll just get a little overexposed stripe at one
side of the shot..
> 3. Are there any sources for the mercury batteries used in the OM-1?
Not any more, unless you get lucky and find some in a hidden drawer at
a shop or something. http://www.criscam.com/mr9.htm is an adapter
that'll convert normal 1.55v cells down to the om-1's voltage, though.
Alternatively, you can use Wein cells (I think that's the spelling)
which are zinc/air cells -- they don't need an adaptor, but they're
"air-powered" so they'll run out over time with or without being used.
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx