DR-5 and DK-22...fit?

[joel_blacher]

Anyone know if the DR-5 will fit on the DK-22 (the adapter that fits screw-

thread accessories to the rectangular eyepieces)? I'd like to use one on a

D200.

[doccamera]

You could buy the DR-6 which fits on all the rectangular digital Nikon eyepieces or use the #2370 eyepiece adapter for using any round eyepiece accessoriey on a square Nikon finder.

[gary_watson]

Nikon should have a table on file that correlates the various DR models and adapters for square and round eyepieces.

[oivind_toien]

I am not familiar with DR-5, however if it has the same thread as the DK-17M magnifying eye pieces etc. that screw directly onto D1 and D2 series cameras, you will need to modify the DK-22 (same as #2370 adapter). There is a good description of it here:

 

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1020&message=19028045&q=dk+17m+adapter&qf=m

[joseph_wisniewski]

Oivind, thanks. I'm glad so many people find that old post of mine useful. Unfortunately, it won't help Joel. If you make my modification to the DK-22 (aka #2370) it will become too fragile to hold a heavy DR-5.

 

Joel, there really isn't a good answer to your question. I don't find the DR-6 to be a viable solution. If at some point you get a higher end DSLR (D3, D2X, D2H, D1X, D1H) there's no way to mount the DR-6. No adapter, at all. It is possible to adapt a DR-5. Like my old DR-3 or the later DR-4, DR-5 has an old style 19mm threaded end, and a step up ring to adapt it to cameras with modern 22mm eyepieces. You simply remove that ring to use it with the DK-22 adapter, without having to grind away any plastic from the DK-22. But even then, the DK-22 is a bit "iffy". I had one split off one of the rails that holds it to the camera eyepiece. No damage to the camera or the DR-3, I caught it when taking the adapter off, but it could just as easily have failed when on the camera, and bye-bye DR-3.

 

So, there's DR-6 with no upgrade path, and DR-5 with a scary adapter. Sorry I don't have a better plan.

[joseph_wisniewski]

Gary, I've got a table like what you describe.

 

The problem is that if I tell Excel to save it as HTML, the HTML it generates is such a steaming pile of Microsoft that it simply can't be posted in a coherent form to photo.net.

 

Sorry.