Help With Options

[Yugoboy]

Don’t forget that used lenses sell for about what you pay for them, and sometimes more. It’s all pretty low risk.

I understand as much as I got out of this statement and plan on risking as much as I can. Maybe less.

[Yugoboy]

Yeah! The 500/1000 arrived!
Before I ordered I did a bit more poking around and found another brand (Opti something or other) for about $10 less, $3 less shipping, and a bonus cleaning kit with mini-tripod with the same measurements.

Anyway… quickie results. I’m currently very happy.
The lens I had 55-200 AF

My backyard at 55mm:

My backyard at 200mm:

New lens: 500/1000
My backyard at 500mm:

My backyard at 1000mm:

I still have to work on focusing, but as of now, not bad. I did find I liked using the tripod on the body and a monopod on the lens’ mount. A lot of work, and probably unwieldy in normal situations, but if I’m doing something where I’ve got the time, and the action is pretty static, it’s definitely the route I’d suggest. (My tripod isn’t as rock-solid as I though, and the head is wobbly, so I like the extra support.

This thing comes with a “T-mount” which is basically an adapter with a Nikon lens ring on one side, and threads like a bolt on the other. The lens screws on. The 2x screws on in between them.

I bring this up because I went to a huuuuuuuge rummage sale to benefit Ronald McDonald House today as well and saw some older lenses that also screwed on. People around me could literally hear the click as the light bulb went on. We ran home and I picked up the T-mount… sure enough! Threads are the same. I can now avail myself of hundreds of lenses that previously were not usable. Picked up a 80-210mm with the idea that I would be able to use the 2x and fill in the gap between 200 and 500. This may not have worked as well as I hoped. The focal distance (not depth of field) is not at telephoto distance. I can, however, shoot some mean porn from across the room.

I guess the lesson is this: if you’re comfortable with garage/rummage sales, and don’t mind manual focus lenses, get yourself a T-mount ASAP.

Also picked up another goodie I’ll be sharing in a bit. Just need to scan it in.

[ravnostic]

T-mounts? Got several, including one for Nikon; it’s the mounting rig for telescopes (and some of my best friends are Nikoners, NTTAWWT…)

[orionid]

I can’t see the photos from work, they’re probably hosted on a site that the company firewall blocks. I’ll comment on those later.

It sounds like you got an M42 mount. Physically, it’s the same as a T-mount; 42mm diameter by 1mm pitch. Pentax popularized the M42 in the US even though it was a German-originated open source. The difference between M42 and T is the flange distance. The gap between the mount and the film/sensor plane is different. On M42 it’s 45.5mm. On T it’s 55mm. Your Nikon F is 46.5mm.

So basically T-mounts work great because your adapter adds 8.5mm making your Nikon a 55mm T-mount SLR. When you fit an M42 into this, you’ve got an extra 9.5mm behaving like an extention tube, thus removing infinity focus and allowing closer/macro focus. Even with an ultra-thin adapter ring of say 1mm, you’d still have the effects of a 2mm extension tube. On older lenses that go past infinity, this is probably negated, but I don’t know if there even is an ultra-thin F->M42 adapter. I know you can get an adapter that maintains infinity by adding a slightly negative diopter to the mix, but at the mercy of the glass quiality they used.

There’s also a T2 Thread at 42mm x 0.75mm. These will bind up your adapter.

Regardless, old lenses for cheaps are always awesome finds. Can’t wait to see what you do with it.

Nerd links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M42_lens_mount
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-mount

Also seems there are ultra-thin M42 to F adapters. One Ebay auction is claiming it maintains infinity focus:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=774453&is=REG&Q=&A=details
http://www.ebay.com/itm/M42-Lens-Nikon-Mount-Adapter-D700-D90-D300S-D3000-/130542200470#vi-content

[staplermofo]

I did find I liked using the tripod on the body and a monopod on the lens’ mount. A lot of work, and probably unwieldy in normal situations, but if I’m doing something where I’ve got the time, and the action is pretty static, it’s definitely the route I’d suggest. (My tripod isn’t as rock-solid as I though, and the head is wobbly, so I like the extra support.

With a 2×4 and some 1/4″ coarse thread screw you can make yourself something like this.

I can, however, shoot some mean porn from across the room.

At 1000mm you must mean … Either Elsinore or I am going to hug you when you say.

[Yugoboy]

I’m curious (not curious) about the whole telescope attachment thing.

We’ve got a couple really really amateur telescopes just wasting away in the basement. Is there some way that doesn’t require machine-shop precision to get those hooked up? aI don’t know what they’d work out to in millimeters, and I certainly wouldn’t want to use them regularly, but seeing’s how I’m going to have complete inadequacy for Farkstronomy, it might be nice to at least try. It would also have some other applications when I have opportunities to be at altitude (buildings or mountains).

[fluffybunny]

I’m curious (not curious) about the whole telescope attachment thing.

We’ve got a couple really really amateur telescopes just wasting away in the basement. Is there some way that doesn’t require machine-shop precision to get those hooked up? aI don’t know what they’d work out to in millimeters, and I certainly wouldn’t want to use them regularly, but seeing’s how I’m going to have complete inadequacy for Farkstronomy, it might be nice to at least try. It would also have some other applications when I have opportunities to be at altitude (buildings or mountains).

Assuming you mean “camera hooked up to a telescope”, just about anything goes:

Just a quick GIS.

[Author]

Posts