More Panasonic P&S perfection

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 05:03:49 -0800, mark.thomas.7 wrote:

> On Nov 15, 12:52 am, SMS 斯蒂文* 夏 <scharf.ste....TakeThisOut@geemail.com> wrote:
>> >http://www.douglasjames.com.au/more-panasonic.htm
>>
>> No such site.
>
> Same here now - worked yesterday - maybe the op hasn't paid his
> bills....

Maybe his filters missed your IP yesterday too.



--
If you don't defend your rights... You end up without any!

agro D-Mac wrote:
> "Deep Reset" <DeepReset DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:PZCdnbmFMvZUGKbanZ2dnUVZ8radnZ2d@bt.com...
>> I don't want to fan any flames here, but I'm genuinely interested in the
>> sort of working distances that P&S cameras are capable of when shooting,
>> say, 1:1 macro.
>> And I mean 1:1, so a subject exactly as wide/tall as the sensor on the
>> camera fills the frame.
>> My experience of P&S macro is that true macro is virtually impossible to
>> light because the subject is too close to the front element, but trying to
>> remain open-minded, I'm happy to be re-educated.
>>
>> Deep.
>>
>>
>
> I have a 70 - 200 F/2.8 lens I use on my DSLR (oh yes, I use them a lot!)
> and using a ring between the lens and the body allows me to use the 200mm
> end and come close to getting 1.1. I've never measured it but I may be
> exceeding that magnification. It allows for a more comfortable distance but
> also has the downside of the slightest movement is exaggerated too.
>
> I have little or no use for 1:1 macro with the FZ50s but I did buy a #2
> close up Hoya "filter" element for it some time back and it's results were
> acceptable but nothing I'd use for big prints. The issue with the FZ and
> macro is that the "macro" switch only works at relatively wide angle. The
> thought of using the 340mm end of the lens in macro mode, just doesn't
> happen. I'm afraid where very sharp, clear 1:1 macro is concerend, there
> isn't much else but a DSLR that is affordable.
>
> Canon make a nice add on lens that gives macro capabilities to some of the
> lenses. It works on any camera with the right filter thread. Not cheap but
> does a good job
Whoaa.... hold the phone.... D-Mac said something that I
actually agree with!!
In all seriousness Doug, did you try the FZ50 with the #2 at
telephoto? In theory at least, with a #2 infinity should be
at about 500mm, which at 300'ish should be pretty close to
1:1 (35mm equiv).
The trouble with closeups of course is that you are adding
an additional optical element, which has it's own
characteristics and may have odd interactions with the
existing glass, so you are perfectly correct to say that the
results won't be as good as a dedicated macro lens. I am
surprised a little though that you say it was acceptible but
not good enough for big prints.
I've never really been happy with closeups myself, but
then I've never bothered using them on good glass. Although
your little panasonic gets bagged out, I know they do have
good lenses, and I would have thought that with it's good
optics, it would have done ok with a closeup filter.
>
> Douglas
>
>