>
>Especially in the days of OM cameras, the core principle was to get the
>camera as near to the top of the tripod as possible, in the pursuit of
>utter stability and image sharpness. I still subscribe to that principle;
>from what I learned in Physics classes, that makes very good sense to me..
>
>John Johns (for whom I once worked, and who enabled me into my first
>35mm camera, a Practica FX with Zeiss Tessar) in his still-available book
>(2nd hand, via www.bookfinder.com ) "Know your camera" also has
>illustrated examples which I learned to follow.
>
>I still have the Olympus system gear for rack and pinion etc getting close
>to plants etc, but I never found this stable or (especially) firm enough
>for decent results. I generally have no problem moving the tripod in-toto
>physically to the exact distance I need.
>
Stability is a key issue with field macro photography. The combination of
wind and my own shakiness has caused many opportunities to be spoiled, so I'm
heavily pursuing this tripod issue. This last exercised showed me that the
inverted column approach is not the best overall, though it does work in some
instances.
Ground spikes are nice, provided you're not working in deep sand or solid
rock. The Cullman arm is intriguing, and Manfrotto has a similar 131/3059
accessory. I'll have to see if they have one of these at the local camera shop.
Chris
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|