akira

<p>Garuda, from 8c.</p><div></div>

<p>How about Novoflex (another Arca-Swiss compatible)?<br /> <a href="http://www.novoflex.com/en/products/camera-support-systems/quick-release-systems/qmount/">http://www.novoflex.com/en/products/camera-support-systems/quick-release-systems/qmount/</a><br /> (scroll way down the page)</p>

<p>Nice idea. I would, however, sacrifice a clip to extract the magnet and glue the magnet inside the lens cap, after making sure that it won't hit or scratch the filter or the front element. The clip would lose its otherwise more universal function, though.</p>

<p>If you travel with a film body, you should carry fair amount of films, too. Then, the difference between F3 and FG (or any camera in that size) could be negligible. The reliability of F3 body should mean more. Leave the troubled MD-4 at home. :)</p>

<p>IIRC, the aperture is opened. So, you might be able to reverse-mount the lens for larger-than-life size closeups. </p>

<p>Unfortunately, no. There are several reasons:<br /> 1. The lens is designed only for 17.3x13mm (4/3 format) coverage. OM (35mm film) system requires much larger 24x36mm coverage.<br /> 2. 4/3 lens requires electric power to focus (even manually) and actuate aperture blades. There is no way to power the lens from OM bodies.<br /> 3. The flange back (the distance between the mount and the image sensor/film plane) of OM is much longer than that of 4/3 camera. So, even if you manage to mount the lens on an OM body, you are confined to (very) near distances.<br /> 4. I don't think anyone dare to make an adapter because of the reasons above.</p>

<p>Hope this would be of any help.</p>

<p>I think the eyepiece adapter for Nikon can be also used when combined with a Nikon lens to 4/3 body adapter. There are viable options other than the dedicated adapter for 4/3.</p>

<p>Not good, not funny. Just disgusting.</p>

<p>The best timing depends on the particular model. If you are selling old DSLR, the best timing has been long gone.</p>

<p>So, you may want to visit getdpi.com. It offers "4/3rds Cameras" forum and there is a long thread called "Fun with Panasonic 100-300". I've found a poster who seems to own both Canon 100-400 and Panny 100-300 and other long lenses. Maybe you can get more practical info there.</p>

<p>Andrew, if you go for those types of images seriously, you would have to get Nikon D3S with 600/4.0 or 800/5.6 monsters.</p>

<p>If you are on a budget, the best bet would be to stay with your 100-400 and replace your camera with either EOS Rebel T3i or 60D, i.e. the latest bodies that offer better high-ISO performance and wider dynamic range.</p>

<p>Andrew, if you meant the lighting ouside in the daytime in a cloudy day by "low light", you shouldn't be worried about my post. You will be just fine with the contrast-dect (CD) AF.</p>

<p>I, having migrated from Nikon D2H and D40 to Panasonic G1 and now GH2, have found that CD AF has already surpassed phase-detect (PD) AF in some situations. For example, if you use Panasonic 20/1.7 lens on G1 or GH2, it focuses much faster and more accurately than Nikon D700 with AF-S 50/1.4 or D300S with AF-S 35/1.8 combo does, when all combos are used in the single-AF modes.</p>

<p>That said, EVIL cameras with CD-AF are still inferior to the conventional DSLRs when used in any "continuous" (continuous AF or continuous shooting) modes.</p>

<p>My concern is that the OP is going to use the lens in "low light". I've found my 14-42 kit zoom set at 14mm (meaning, f3.5) hunts in the same situation where my 20/1.7 focuses flawlessly (the body is GH2). In the same lighting situation, I didn't have any AF problem when I used Nikon D40 with the 18-55 kit lens at either end (meaning, even at f5.6). I can say "in the same lighting sutuation" because both combow were tested in my room whose lighting has remained the same.</p>

<p>I would fear that the contrast-detect AF is inferior to the phase-detect AF in low light situation, and doubt if Pany 100-300 zoom could perform the same way as Canon EF 100-400 in low light.</p>

<p>Well, actually, the second one was shot eight minutes later...</p>

<p>The same sky, only three minutes later...</p><div></div>

<p>GH2, 14-42 kit zoom.</p><div></div>

<p>Clicking the command dial should switch between aperture and shutter speed controls.</p>

<p>GH2 Nikkor-Q 200/4.0f, 13sec at f8.0</p>

<div></div>

<p>I have a Nikon lens catalog from 2004 which lists all of Y48, O56 and R60 for 62, 72 and 77mm among the B&W filters.</p>

<p>That said, the only multicoated genuine Nikon filters are L37C (UV-cut), L1BC (skylight), NC (neutral color for protection) and Circular Polarizer II. I'm not sure whether Nikon B&W filters are singlecoated or non-coated.</p>

<p>There are bunch of multicoated B&W filters out there (at least Kenko/Hoya and Marumi, I don't have detailed info on German or American brands) and they should perform better than Nikon ones.</p>

<p>For what type of images did you use the ND filter? If you use it for a long exposure (for misty effect of running water, for example) on a tripod, you should make sure to cover the eyepiece to cut the stray light from the viewfinder to avoid incorrect metering.</p>

<p>I would just echo John and Gerry. Even if you can put the mount back to the lens (which is not likely, unfortunately), there would be no gurarantee that the lens can focus at infinity correctly.</p>

<p>I would have liked to see a 40mm "equivalent" for DX format...</p>

<p>What is the lens you currently have? If it is a kit lens, you should already be able to go down to 14mm. If you don't, a second-hand Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm/F3.5-5.6 should be the cheapest bet. If you want to go any wider, it should be difficult to do cheaply.</p>

<p>Sigma used to offer AF lenses for 4/3 mount but they seem to be dropping the lenses from their lineup. The wideangle zoom Sigma offers (or has been offering until recently) is (was) 10-20mm/F4.0-5.6 EX DC HSM, which should be more expensive than Olympus one mentioned above.</p>

<p>Olympus still offers even wider 4/3 zooms, but they are more expensive than anything mentioned above.</p>

<p>Looks like a generic flash bracket that can be found in any decent camera shop.</p>

<p>If you happen to use 28-70 both on a MF film cameras (FM, FE, F3, etc.) along with DSLR, you'd better stay with 28-70. You cannot control the aperture of 24-70 on these film bodies.</p>

<p>As you may already know, reversing lenses involves larger-than-life macro which is not really casual.</p>

<p>The filter size of Zuiko 50/1.8 is 49mm. 49mm seems to be the standard for the OM lenses in the popular range. You may want to refer to this famous website for fairly extensive info on OM and Nikkor lenses:<br>

<a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/">http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/</a></p>