Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

smaller baffle plates?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • smaller baffle plates?

    Hi all!

    In my conversions of the hexanons, I always fit a baffle plate with a smaller hole in it. (don't know if the correct name is baffle plate, it is anyway the plate on the back of the lens, which light passes through last)

    Somebody told me that I had to do this, to improve contrasts and colour. Lately i have experimented a lot with these holes on my hexanons, and most correct, a smaller app. 17mm(smaller than this brings some vignetting) hole brings more contrast and more colour.

    My question is,- have anybody mounted baffle plates with smaller holes in them on any OM lens? I should believe, since the OM lenses is constructed for film, the smaller sensor on 4/3 should make this possible.

  • #2
    Re: smaller baffle plates?

    Originally posted by sille View Post
    Hi all!

    In my conversions of the hexanons, I always fit a baffle plate with a smaller hole in it. (don't know if the correct name is baffle plate, it is anyway the plate on the back of the lens, which light passes through last)

    Somebody told me that I had to do this, to improve contrasts and colour. Lately i have experimented a lot with these holes on my hexanons, and most correct, a smaller app. 17mm(smaller than this brings some vignetting) hole brings more contrast and more colour.

    My question is,- have anybody mounted baffle plates with smaller holes in them on any OM lens? I should believe, since the OM lenses is constructed for film, the smaller sensor on 4/3 should make this possible.
    I can imagine that lenses designed for 135 format frames, and project a much wider image circle, could cause reflections off the inside of the mirror box onto the sensor, so reducing contrast and affecting colour. Does your baffle plate act to crop the exit pupil of the lens?

    Ian
    Founder/editor
    Four Thirds User (http://fourthirds-user.com)
    Digital Photography Now (http://dpnow.com)
    Olympus UK E-System User Group (http://e-group.uk.net)
    Olympus camera, lens, and accessory hire (http://e-group.uk.net/hire)
    Twitter: www.twitter.com/ian_burley
    Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/dpnow/
    Pinterest: www.pinterest.com/ianburley/

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: smaller baffle plates?

      Yes, that i think is exactly why i am getting more contrast and clearer colours with a smaller hole in the baffle plates on my hexanons. I think it crops down the exit pupil, and therefore reduces internal reflections. I use a plastic material which i paint matte black.

      Hmm,- i think i might want to test this out on my om 50mm......

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: smaller baffle plates?

        Originally posted by sille View Post
        Hi all!

        In my conversions of the hexanons, I always fit a baffle plate with a smaller hole in it. (don't know if the correct name is baffle plate, it is anyway the plate on the back of the lens, which light passes through last)

        Somebody told me that I had to do this, to improve contrasts and colour. Lately i have experimented a lot with these holes on my hexanons, and most correct, a smaller app. 17mm(smaller than this brings some vignetting) hole brings more contrast and more colour.

        My question is,- have anybody mounted baffle plates with smaller holes in them on any OM lens? I should believe, since the OM lenses is constructed for film, the smaller sensor on 4/3 should make this possible.
        Thanks for sharing this, I'm currently working on a OM Zuiko 50/1.4 and am going to put a baffle plate in it. So the 17mm should be the same for every 35mm lens? am I right

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: smaller baffle plates?

          I have a Konica Hexanon AR 57 mm f/1.4 and 40 mm f/1.8 that I have rigged up to the e-510... I put a baffle on the 1.4 but haven't gotten to the 1.8 yet. My baffle is made out of a gasket material (cardboard-like) that i colored in with a black sharpie marker. It's a pretty hack job---not even circular. i wonder if the details matter... should I make a better one? I tried to make the hole roughly the same diameter as the back element of the 4/3 kit lenses.

          btw i love the hexanons. its so cool that you don't even need to use an adapter to use them with the e-510, they're cheap, and very good image quality.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: smaller baffle plates?

            i just noticed that a dime is exactly 17mm across! i should have thought of that in the first place....

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: smaller baffle plates?

              Any "how to's"? Do you open up the lens or attach to the rear lens element (mount)?

              Would be interested to see some comparisson shots

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: smaller baffle plates?

                http://gfsnt.no/hexanon/ this is where I went as a reference when converting my hexanons.

                i didn't make any comparison shots but i can tell the difference through the viewfinder. without the baffle, there is a slight luminous glow to everything (that looks cool as an effect) and little bit of flare/glare... with baffle everything is darker (more realistic) and very contrasty, without flare/glare.

                i used scotch tape to attach my baffles around the sides of the piece with all the glass in it, so the baffle moves with the glass as you focus.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: smaller baffle plates?

                  rjstaunt, thanks

                  MikkoH, did you manage to get the 50 f1.4 working?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: smaller baffle plates?

                    This is very interesting. I wonder if it would be possible to fit something semi-permanently in the MF-1 adaptor to achieve the same effect? (Obviously, the Hexanons are a different case - I have a 40mm f1.8 in the process of conversion at the moment, and will try a baffle on that too)
                    Hugh of Bardfield
                    Essex, UK
                    http://www.flickr.com/photos/hughofbardfield/
                    http://hughweller-lewisphotography.blogspot.com/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: smaller baffle plates?

                      Originally posted by Kuifje View Post
                      rjstaunt, thanks

                      MikkoH, did you manage to get the 50 f1.4 working?
                      The 50 f1.4 work unbelievably great! The baffle plate really does make a clear difference

                      heres a
                      pic of the baffle plate

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: smaller baffle plates?

                        Now what if someone would start producing an OMZ to mFT adaptor but then with:

                        a) a micro adjustable lenght so that you can easily fine tune infinity setting on legacy glass.

                        b) an adjustable diafram, or replaceable orifices, to "baffle" or catch all light not intended for the sensor.

                        As it is fully manual it can't be that hard to make .. and you would not need to modify lenses to reach optimum contrast.

                        Hmm .. I would be interested..

                        Martin

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: smaller baffle plates?

                          Originally posted by MikkoH View Post
                          The 50 f1.4 work unbelievably great! The baffle plate really does make a clear difference

                          heres a
                          pic of the baffle plate
                          I can second that - here's what I did just now - here on a MF-1 copy with the dandelion chip (looks crap - but the result is excellent). Noticeably, wide open on a 50mm f1.4, the result is sharper because of less glare.

                          Just a bit of card glued into the mf-1, 1mm recessed from the back of the adapter.

                          Andy
                          Last edited by AndyElliott; 9th May 2009, 01:59 PM.
                          Olympus E-M1 ZD 7-14 f4, 300 f2.8, PL 25 f1.4D
                          mZuiko 12-40 f2.8 Pro, 60 f2.8, 40-150 f2.8 Pro
                          EC-14, EC-20, HLD-7
                          Metz 58 AF-1&2 , Manfrotto 441, Gimbal Head, Velbon Neopod 74


                          Gallery: http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/elliott.aje.andy

                          Website: 361photography.com 361wild.com

                          "Oly_OM" @ e_group

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: smaller baffle plates?

                            I'm no optics expert but I should think that a rough edge to the aperture of the baffle might cause small scale distortion/diffusion which would degrade the image slightly. I haven't tried making a baffle yet so this is only conjecture.

                            I think I will laser cut some 'perfect' 17mm dia holes in some thin acrylic and run some comparisons. Blacked shim steel would be better but I can't get that laser cut (at least not free).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: smaller baffle plates?

                              Actualy I was thinking about this a couple of days ago.
                              I was thinking of a bafle plate with a rectangular hole in it, made of thin blacked copper plate and mount that on the rear of the OM<>4/3 adapter.

                              Maybe a rectangular hole will work even better because you block off more unwanted light. Have to try that......

                              Peter

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X