To the group,
As I wrote in a recent post, I am currently building a 6x16 camera.
The
latest string on viewfinders was particularly interesting because that
is
what I am working on now.
I had planned to use the usual, inexpensive wide angle solution, the
"peephole" or door viewer. But it produces an image that is small,
dark and
wider angle than I need. I found that by removing the last dome shaped
lens
and substituting an auxiliary WA lens for a point-and-shoot camera,
I got a
bigger, brighter more suitable image. The angle of view was reduced
from
about 150* to 80* or so, with less distortion.
I decided to continue experimenting and bought some glass from Edmund
Scientific. I happened to have some telescoping 1" tubing in my workshop
(from another project); the Edmund 25mm lenses fit right in. Since
the
shortest negative focal length they sell is -25mm, I also bought a
-50mm and
paired it to give me -12mm(?). At the other end of the viewfinder I
got a
40mm positive lens to enlarge the scene.
I have not yet mounted everything, but it works. I get a big, bright
image
of approximately 90* which I will mask to my format proportions. Cool,
but
not as cheap as the "peephole". The coated lenses cost about $20 apiece,
and
if you get their nicely machined black mounts the system will run over
$100.
- - - -
- - -
On an unrelated matter, I would like to cast a vote against the
rehabilitation of the word "hack". When someone "hacks" it sounds like
he is
doing something bad or crude; I think it should stay that way.
For my own efforts to make a viewfinder without benefit of design or
manufacturer's facility, I prefer to think I am improvising or adapting
but
definitely NOT hacking.
Stan Patz NYC
SKP113@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.PatzImaging.com
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.