> "Vesa Perala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any idea how short the EOS extension tubes can/could be?
> I know the 12mm tubes are common but for wideangle lenses I would
> prefer something like half of that.
> Has anyone opened and checked the 12mm tubes inside; is there
> a reason why they couldn't be even shorter?
Hi Vesa,
In what situation do you find that <%ONTOPIC%> 12mm extension
tube is too long?
I've been pondering your question for a while. I suspect it would
too hard to machine AF and aperture linkages on mechanical mounts
within smaller length than 12mm.
But you rightly pointed out that the <%ONTOPIC%> lens mount is
fully-electronic! So, there is no technical reason why a shorter
(e.g. 6mm) extension tube could not be manufactured. After all,
there is even a 2.5mm thick Nikon-to-EOS adapter
http://cameraquest.com/adapreos.htm
to bridge the gap between the Nikon 46.50mm lens register and the
<%ONTOPIC%> 44mm register. See:
http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm
But why would such a thing does not exist?
. Maybe it is easier to crop the resultant photo during printing?
. Or maybe it so easy to adjust the magnification by adjusting
the working distance (with your feet or a macro focussing rail)?
. Or to move the zoom ring and/or focus ring to get the exact
magnification you want on a zoom lens?
. Or maybe to change to another lens? E.g. the <%ONTOPIC%> 100mm
macro where the magnification is continuously adjustable down
to 1:1
Does this make any sense?
Cheers
Julian Loke
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
