On 4 Mar 01 at 21:00, Julian Loke wrote:
> > "Gary Fisher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eos/message/69357
> > ... Also think of the flare problems you'd have if you
> > managed to melt a hole through the plastic barrel of
> > your new lens :-( I'll bet they don't multi-coat
> > the EDGES of any EF lens elements!!
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> ROFLOL. I think WJM used the soldering iron on the
> Cokin P holder, not the EF lens! He did destroy the
> round filter-holder in doing so, which precludes using
> the Cokin CPOL.
Nope, it excludes using this circular slot *only* when mounting the
holder this way on the 20/2.8....there is nothing destroyed, only the
bayonet-wings are molded into the plastic....much less destructive
than removing the first (two) slots from the top of the holder (which
does allow using the CPOL of course).
Further note that while this bayonet-solution was necessary on the
Minolta 20/2.8, the EOS 20/2.8 is virtually free of vignetting with
normal use of the Cokin-P holder, even when the holder is set
diagonally....the EOS 20-35 is probably much worse in this respect
(and the 24/3.5 even more; all share the same bayonet-shape for the
hood (hood itself might be different, not sure))
That said, the Cokin color-pol's (these come in a square frame) have
become my preferred way of polarisation (in particular the blue or
yellow/blue version), and these squares are not affected by how you
mount the holder on the 20/2.8, nor does putting the holder diagonal
lead to vignetting.
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
