|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 27th, 2011, 02:21 PM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Lebanon
Posts: 51
|
If they can do it for micro 4/3 why not F3?
|
|
|
|
June 27th, 2011, 02:54 PM
|
#2 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rancho Santa Margarita
Posts: 590
|
Re: If they can do it for micro 4/3 why not F3?
An adpater that has its own iris blades built into the adapter? I'm curious if any lens experts think that moving the iris plane from the lens' natural iris plane to the adapter instead, will have any ill effects. Doesn't the plane of the iris need to stay exactly where it is in relation to the other lens elements?
|
|
|
|
|
June 27th, 2011, 07:11 PM
|
#3 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK
Posts: 4,957
|
Re: If they can do it for micro 4/3 why not F3?
Most report some vignetting with these adapters and limited useable "iris" range as a result. The aperture is in the wrong place in the optical path so it doesn't work as well as it should.
__________________
Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
