Most Useless Adaptor Ever

Advert

New Replies

Report Bug

Help/FAQs

Most Useless Adaptor Ever

This topic has 9 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 September 2016 at 09:37 by Neil Wyatt.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

Author

Posts
31 August 2016 at 19:53 #253251
Neil Wyatt
Moderator
@neilwyatt
I bought (for a very modest sum, just ofver £8) a kit of three 52 front filters plus an adaptor for my bridge camera off the 'bay.

Now despite what the ad said, for P520 and P530, the web suggests that the p520 (my camera) doesn't actually have a thread, just parallel rings. But as the 'thread' is interrupted, I thought I might bodge it on or even turn off the thread and glue it in place.

The 'adaptor ring' which I expect does fit the P530 has an interesting property. It has a 52mm x 1mm pitch female thread for the filter on one side.

On the camera side it has a 52mm by 1mm pitch male thread…

Thankfully the filters seem to be quite good. The UV is branded Kenko and was boxed and in a foam +plastic case, so worth the price of the whole caboodle.

The other two are branded RISE(UK) and appear to be cheap as chips from this UK wholesale operation, but the circular polariser does a great job.

The other is a FLD meant to get rid of green casts under fluorescent light so pretty redundant these days with auto white balance, but it may serve as a 'gentle' nebula-boosting filter cutting blue to orange up to 50% while letting through more violet and a lot more red. Worth an experiment.
Advert

31 August 2016 at 19:53 #34727
Neil Wyatt
Moderator
@neilwyatt
31 August 2016 at 20:16 #253254
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Neil,

Is the 'useless' aspect the 1mm pitch ?

… Don't think I've ever seen a screw-threaded camera filter that wasn't 0.75mm pitch

MichaelG.
31 August 2016 at 20:23 #253256
JasonB
Moderator
@jasonb
I think the useless bit is that you are adapting the camera thread to what is essentially the same thing eg start with 52mm female and end up with 52mm female, pitch makes little difference.

Unless it adapts 1.0mm to 0.75mm?
31 August 2016 at 21:34 #253271
Neil Wyatt
Moderator
@neilwyatt
Sorry, yes, it's 0.75 both sides. The last camera thread I cut was for an M42 adaptor which is 1mm pitch.

As Jason says it sis more of a 4mm (ish) extender than an 'adaptor'.

Neil
31 August 2016 at 21:43 #253277
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Should be nice for adding some creative vignettes.

MichaelG.
31 August 2016 at 22:41 #253302
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Could it be that the front element of the P530 lens protrudes a little into the filter-thread length ?

It's just possible that these 'slim' filters would touch the front element [hence making the 'useless' adapter very useful indeed].

… Just a thought

MichaelG.
31 August 2016 at 23:26 #253320
Bazyle
Participant
@bazyle
I have some 'adaptors' that are the same size & pitch each end, called 'rings' they are for moving the lens further away to provide a macro function, like bellows in fixed increments.
1 September 2016 at 08:51 #253358
Michael Gilligan
Participant
@michaelgilligan61133
Posted by Bazyle on 31/08/2016 23:26:28:

I have some 'adaptors' that are the same size & pitch each end, called 'rings' they are for moving the lens further away to provide a macro function, like bellows in fixed increments.

.

… and very useful they are, too

But Neil's "adapter" ring fits on the front of the lens, in the filter thread.

MichaelG.
1 September 2016 at 09:37 #253373
Neil Wyatt
Moderator
@neilwyatt
Yes, I have a set of M42 extension tubes

All this 'adaptor' does is fit in the space where a filter could fit.

… well that was embarrassingly easy, i just spent a couple of minutes turning off the thread and making it a close push-fit in the front of the camera.

It does cause minor vignetting at the shortest zoom so I will only use it when needed, but it opens the door to using my old 52mm filters and even my Cokin holder.

Neil
Author

Posts