Kenneth Waller wrote:
All this is moot if I can't get a longer plate than the 7" one that is on
the lens at the moment.
You might try Kirk.
I saw this and the first thing that sprang to mind was...
call Spock.
http://www.onlinephotographers.com/yabbse/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=45067.0;id=25422;image
I am a sick man...
Kenneth Waller
-----Original Message-----
From: William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Jan 13, 2006 1:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Continuing to Accessorize Bertha
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Waller"
Subject: Re: Continuing to Accessorize Bertha
I see your dilemma.
Is the lens tripod mount modified? It doesn't look like it would go with a
lens of that size/weight.
It looks stock. Apparently our own Fred Wasti was the original owner of this
lens. Perhaps he could shed some light on this.
I am hesitant to put a spacer between the lens plate and the lens body, as
it would add a weak point in the attachment, and would complicate
supporting the lens at the front of the plate.
I think if you used quality attaching bolts, that engage the maximum
thread depth in the lens mount, the joint would be no less strong than
what you have now. You would have a slightly higher cantilever moment on
the lens mount but it should be OK.
If the added spacer only shadowed the existing lens mount footprint, I
don't see how it would complicate supporting the lens @ the front of the
plate.
Complicate only in relation to what I have done now, which is to put some
closed cell foam onto the plate to support the lens.
All this is moot if I can't get a longer plate than the 7" one that is on
the lens at the moment.
William Robb
________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
