OT: Kodak DX6490 Lens Adapter

J
Posted By
JPWhite
May 27, 2004
Views
714
Replies
27
Status
Closed
For those of us here that own a Kodak DX6490, Kodak have started supplying a screw on lens adapter that allows us to attach standard 55mm Filters and lenses to the camera. The Kodak part number is 1525088.

If you know how to google you can find one from a wide selection of vendors. Looks like prices range from $17 to $20. Mine’s on order and should arrive this weekend.

One thing that has frustrated me recently with the DX6490 is the poor macro capability, hence my lackluster entries into the latest challenge. With this adapter I should be able to attach add on macro lenses that should make life easier. Be too late for the challenge tho 🙁

JP
Related Tags
lens

How to Improve Photoshop Performance

Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!

JH
Joe_Henry1000
May 27, 2004
Hi JP,

That’s interesting that you find the DX6490’s macro capability "poor". I’ve found that that to be a strength of this camera. Hmmm…

I was very excited when I found out back in March that Kodak was going to offer an adapter, filters and lenses for this camera. Just last week I got an email from B & H stating that both the adapter and the Wide Angle lens are in stock. WooHoo! Now I just have to convince my wife that this is a must have. She’s pretty skeptical when I tell her I "need" more toys. Hmmm…. Fathers day is coming up isn’t it. 😉

On a related subject, does anyone have an opinion on whether or not there’s any advantage to buying the filters specifically made for a particular camera? According to B & H’s description < http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlis t&A=details&Q=&sku=320627&is=REG> this Kodak polarizer filter is specifically made for auto-exposure and auto-focus cameras (like the 6490). I know I can’t buy a filter that’s made for a manual focus camera but I’m wondering if I really need to buy the Kodak.

Joe
J
JPWhite
May 28, 2004
I have found it difficult to focus the DX6490 close up either on wide angle setting or zoomed in. For example look at the following pic.

<http://www.pbase.com/image/29249426>

Nice shot of the flowers, but what I was really after was a close up of the insect on the leftmost flower. This is as close as I could get without loosing focus.

As for your polorizer, I would guess that any circular polarizer would do the job, I doubt there is anything special about the Kodak polarizer (except the price). Best thing is to go to a photo store and ask if you can try one. If you can focus outside without problems I’d say buy that one.

JP
J
JPWhite
May 29, 2004
I got my adapter yesterday and went down to Wolf Camera today to get a few filters.

They sell a low cost circular polarizing filter for $29.99. Quantray isn’t exactly top brand but it does work with the DX6490 without any discernible difference to the focus ability. <http://tinyurl.com/268bo>

You can always buy a Nikon Circular polarizer from them for $123. Not me. At $29 I can afford to lose/abuse the Quantray filter.

I purchased 3 filters since they are running a buy 2 get 1 free deal. he other filters are a +3 close up and a neutral density. The ND filter should come in handy, the lens only stops down to F8 which can pose problems in bright lighting conditions.

One drawback to the new adapter is that if I want to leave it mounted permanently to the camera, I’ll have to get a new camera bag!! Given the design it would actually be quite a sensible thing to do. Leave the adapter on there all the time with a 1A skylight to keep the lens free of grot and scratches and also protect the lens from knocks when it is extended during use. I found it necessary to turn the adapter anticlockwise until it clicks before screwing it on the ‘right way’ otherwise it tends to catch, another reason to leave it on.

JP
JH
Joe_Henry1000
May 29, 2004
Thanks for the info JP.

I’ve got my adapter on order (out of stock, unfortunately) as well as the Wide angle lens. My wife was very kind to me but I’m going to pay (literally) come anniversary time. 😉

What’s a 1A skylight?

Oh, and did you buy a macro lens yet? I’m curious to find out what kind of results you get.

Joe
JF
Jodi_Frye
May 29, 2004
that’s what was nice about my Finepix…the adapter was included and it does say to leave it on the camera for all the reasons JP mentioned ( so I do..makes it ‘look’ bigger too 😉 ). I would like to pic up some filters like that….JP, keep us posted on how well they work. I got your link bookmarked for the occasion( assuming it’s good news ) 🙂
J
JPWhite
May 29, 2004
1A Skylight is a filter that doesn’t do a whole lot, which makes it a great protector for the camera lens without altering the exposure.

Here’s a description from a web vendor.

The Skylight filter corrects for bluish light quality of open shade but most people use it to protect their lens from dust and scratches. Will also absorb ultra violet rays without affecting exposure.

It’s meant to help cut through haze as well, ‘tho I can’t say I’ve ever noticed a big difference with my old film SLR.

I will post a link to some photos following Jodi’s post in a few….

JP
JF
Jodi_Frye
May 29, 2004
great ! looking forward to seeing your images.
J
JPWhite
May 29, 2004
I took some quick shots today while walking the dog.

Remember the photo showing three flowers? Here is one using the 3x screw on ‘macro’ lens <http://www.pbase.com/image/29508309>
See how much closer it is than the original
<http://www.pbase.com/image/29249426>
Not the same exact flower (couldn’t find it again) but they are pretty much identical otherwise.

The problem with my technique was that I left the camera on automatic and it chose an F Stop of 2.8 so the closeup of the flower is only partly in focus. I need to remember to manually stop it down to increase depth of field when I get so close. Duh!!

Here’s a shot using the polarizer
<http://www.pbase.com/image/29508311>
and without
<http://www.pbase.com/image/29508313>

They were both uploaded without any ‘photoshopping’ done to them. The polarizer eliminates some of the glare so you can see the lake bottom more clearly, notice that without the filter you see the cloud reflections. Also notice the polarizer increased the exposure by several stops as it blocks quite a bit of light. (click on show exif to see shot data).

The rest of my quicky macro efforts can be found at <http://www.pbase.com/jpwhite/testshots> the last 6 were taken today using the filters (ignore the first 2).

JP
DS
Dick_Smith
May 29, 2004
Jodi,

Did the adapter come in the same color as the camera? My 6900 didn’t come with one and the only ones on the market then were silver in color which matched the 4900 nicely, on mine it looks just a wee bit out of place! 😉

Been thinking about a way to make it black, or at least dark gray.

Dick
JH
Joe_Henry1000
May 29, 2004
Thanks for posting the images JP. What brand of macro lens did you buy?

BTW, those water shots were very cool. Must be nice to be able to walk the dog in such a picturesque local.

Joe
CS
Chuck_Snyder
May 29, 2004
JP, nice shots!

I had no idea the polarizer would have that large an effect on exposure value; that’s nearly four whole stops (500>250>125>60 would be four and your camera went to 90).

I bought a Tiffen filter set recently for my Canon G2; contains a UV filter (glorified lens protector) a polarizer and a warming filter (812). Haven’t tried ’em out yet. They were very cheap, though, so I’m not expecting much; just bought them to round out an order from Amazon.com to get free shipping!

Chuck
J
JPWhite
May 29, 2004
The lens is made by Quantaray (whoever they are). Hardly Cokin but it works and at $19.99 I can’t complain.

The dog likes to swim in the lake, so she appreciates the scenery also!! Tennessee is a great place – we call it home now.

JP
JF
Jodi_Frye
May 29, 2004
JP, nice shots ! Do you feel you are happy with the 3 X macro screw on ? Can you keep it on for all shots ? is it to infinity ? I like the polarize filter but I’m not sure if I really need it. Will have to think about that. I’ve been debating the extra tele and wide lenses for my camera….of course if money was not an issue i’d have them…. but, am I worth it ? It’s not hair color 😉
J
JPWhite
May 29, 2004
Chuck,

Thanks for the compliments!

Notice also on the unfiltered image that the extra glare made the light meter in the camera over react a bit. The green foliage is darker without the polarizer. I suppose the reflections acted like backlighting. It still did pretty well considering the glare. My guess is that polarizer cut the light by 3 stops then the camera took another 1/2 stop off all by itself for good measure.

For those reading that have never used a polarizer before, they rotate a full 360 degrees. By rotating the filter the polarizing effect is increased or reduced and the effect is obvious as you look at the EVF or back panel. The most effective use of the polarizer is when you point the camera 90 degrees from the sun (EG east or west if the sun is in the south) the deep blue effect on the sky is amazing. Couldn’t give you any examples today due to those cloud thingys that got in the way 🙁

JP
CS
Chuck_Snyder
May 29, 2004
JP, thanks for the tips. I’ll try out my sketchy polarizer and report back. Maybe I should revitalize by pBase account while I’m at it.

Chuck
J
jhjl1
May 29, 2004
One must be careful because the deep blue sky can quickly become artificial looking.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message
Chuck,
the deep blue effect on the sky is amazing. >
JP
CS
Chuck_Snyder
May 29, 2004
James, I’ll bet that would be easy to correct with a curves and/or hue/saturation adjustment layer. It would also be useful, I would think, for a shot you wanted to convert to black-and-white….?

Chuck
J
jhjl1
May 29, 2004
I agree with you. I use a polarizer for most shots that have sky in them. Like anything else in our hobby, it’s easier to try and get it right rather than try and fix it.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message
James, I’ll bet that would be easy to correct with a curves and/or hue/saturation adjustment layer. It would also be useful, I would
think,
for a shot you wanted to convert to black-and-white….?
Chuck

J
JPWhite
May 29, 2004
Jodi,

Thank you as well for the compliments.

I don’t think the screw on lens I got can hold a candle to a true macro lens. It is more like a magnifying glass than a true lens (it’s the same thickness as a regular filter). I’m happy enough with it, it overcomes the limitations of the macro mode my camera has. You can’t use it all the time, it only works for close up stuff. It won’t extend your zoom if that’s what you were hoping, at infinity everything is a blur (it’s like putting reading glasses on your camera, you can’t use reading glasses to drive!). BTW I lied about the price, it cost $12.99 not $19.99. I don’t know if one can buy screw on ‘true macro’ lenses to extend the capabilities of a non removable lens, my guess is probably not.

One can also buy other screw on lenses of differing magnification. 1x 2x and 4x are also readily available. You can ‘stack them’ to increase the effect (at the expense of quality). The more you increase the magnification the more you need a tripod, and ultimately a focusing rail if you really get serious about it. I’ll probably use my tripod more, but can’t see me getting a focusing rail anytime soon.

For educational purposes here are a few web links that talk about macro lenses for Nikon SLR’s

<http://tinyurl.com/2r3e5>

and

<http://tinyurl.com/3yd4u>

Notice on the second webpage how they attach a wide angle lens backwards!! This apparently blows things up with good quality results.
I remember seeing a webpage where a guy took this concept to the extreme and was able to fill the frame with the eye of a fly, can’t find the page right now, but it was really cool (and freaky).

When Joe gets his wide angle maybe he could turn it about face to see if works as a macro lens also!!

JP
JF
Jodi_Frye
May 29, 2004
JP, thanks for all the info ! It’s people like you that make it easier to understand for us dingbats when it comes to this stuff…oh ‘us’ meaning ‘ME’ 🙂 I never really had a chance to really get deep into photography when I used my Canon 35mm. I guess I never really spent enough time with it. Just tried to take good shots and hope for the best when i picked up the envelope of images from the drug store. Too busy doing too many different things at one time I guess. Now that I’ve gone digital ( YAY ME ! ) I feel like i can focus a little more on this stuff (much cheaper for me to practise). Having kids kind of changed my habbits and I think I can probably spend more time focusing on this…ha ha, that was good…"focusing’>>>aint that the truth ! Anyways, thanks again ! I’ll be sure to call on you if i have any other questions…if that’s OK with you.
J
JPWhite
May 30, 2004
Ask away, I don’t mind at all. Though I’m no expert, most of what I know about close up photography I learnt in the last few days lol! Thanks to the Challenge and this forum I am trying new things I’ve never done before. I’ve never given macro photography much thought, you know you take a picture of a flower close up, kinda girlie, so you move on to more macho things like landscapes, fast cars yeah!. The challenge and this forum have made me rethink my photography and I’m quite interested in doing more close up photography. The 100′ challenge will give me an excuse to try some more.

I’m pretty good at picking up technical things, it’s the creative stuff I have trouble with, which is your forte. So I may be calling on you when I need help in that area (like all the time).

JP
J
JPWhite
May 31, 2004
I knew I’d get decent insect shots AFTER the challenge was over.

<http://www.pbase.com/image/29553428>

Lens works pretty dern good.

JP
J
jhjl1
May 31, 2004
Great capture JP.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message
I knew I’d get decent insect shots AFTER the challenge was over.
<http://www.pbase.com/image/29553428>
JH
Joe_Henry1000
Jun 2, 2004
Woo Hoo! B & H finally got some more adapters in stock and mine is on the way. Unfortunately I’m camera-less. 🙁 Cleaning the lens the other day I found a piece of dust that I just couldn’t brush off. Upon further inspection I found that the dust was on the inside of the lens! So I shipped it off to Kodak today. Good thing it’s still under warrantee.

Oh well, I the wide angle lens is back ordered at buy.com anyway so it’s not like I could use either the lens or the adapter for a couple weeks anyway. If any other DX6490 owners are considering this lens buy.com is substantially cheaper than anywhere else I’ve found.

Joe
J
JPWhite
Jun 7, 2004
I read in PC Magazine a review on the low end ‘super zooms’ like the DX6490.

It compared many things including macro capability. Closest distance for the Kodak was 4.7 inches, the worst of the bunch. Best of the bunch was the Olympus 765 which can focus as close as 1/2" in macro mode.

Article can be found at
<http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1602078,00.asp>

JP
WE
Wendy_E_Williams
Jun 7, 2004
Joe,

I feel really sorry for you … getting the new adaptor and having to send your camera back ….. what a shame.

Hope you get it back soon

Wendy
JH
Joe_Henry1000
Jun 8, 2004
Thanks Wendy. They have a 5 day turn around so I should be getting it back by the end of this week or the beginning of next week. I can live without that long. I still don’t have the wide angle lens that I bought the thing for anyway.

Joe

How to Master Sharpening in Photoshop

Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections