a 24mm lens with that much extension is no longer going to be a wide angle, the efl would be rather long actually so coverage shouldnt be a problem even with a 24mm. of course its wise to try just to be sure. JCO
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William Robb > Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 4:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: FA 100mm f=2.8 Macro and macro ring light: Questions > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: J. C. O'Connell > Subject: RE: FA 100mm f=2.8 Macro and macro ring light: > Questions > > > > Sorry, > > > > but the whole point of a ring flash is for photography > > CLOSE to the lens. In fact if used for normal range > > photography, the ringlight will acually increase redeye > > because the flash is so close to the lens axis as the subject > > gets farther away. > > > > re: "rings" in models eyes isnt caused by ringlights, > > probably due to flashhead centered in an umbrella > > causing a donut shaped large light. > > I don't know how red eye entered the discussion. > I suggest you try to reverse mount a short lens, like the 24mm > that was mentioned in the thread to a bellows, put a ring light > on and see if the illumination is full. > Then get back to me. > William Robb > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
