Newton rings - FH869G with "anti Newton ring" glass

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alan Browne
  • Start date Start date
A

Alan Browne

I finally received the glass film holder with the "anti Newton ring"
glass ... and in two corner areas there are strong, large, Newton rings.

Is the because the glass is not sufficiently "tight" and even?

Advice?

Thanks,
Alan
 
Recently said:
I finally received the glass film holder with the "anti Newton ring"
glass ... and in two corner areas there are strong, large, Newton
rings.

Is the because the glass is not sufficiently "tight" and even?

Advice?
Can you see any change in the Newton rings as you squeeze the carrier with
your fingers? If so, and they get larger, perhaps the issue is not
sufficiently, "tight" but too "tight" against the non-Newton glass
surface.

Neil
 
Neil said:
Can you see any change in the Newton rings as you squeeze the carrier with
your fingers? If so, and they get larger, perhaps the issue is not
sufficiently, "tight" but too "tight" against the non-Newton glass
surface.

I got a reply from Davide Littleboy on groups.yahoo Nikon 8000/9000 group.

The kit comes with a mask and strips so that the film is in contact with
the anti-NR glass at the top but prevented from touching the lower glass.

If properly installed after that, no NR's.

An other option is to replace the bottom piece of glass with anti-NR
glass though some seem to believe this will cause a loss of resolution.

Cheers,
Alan
 
Recently said:
I got a reply from Davide Littleboy on groups.yahoo Nikon 8000/9000
group.

The kit comes with a mask and strips so that the film is in contact
with the anti-NR glass at the top but prevented from touching the
lower glass.

If properly installed after that, no NR's.
That makes sense to me, and is how the glass carrier on my 120tf is
constructed. It is the contact with the non-Newton glass that creates the
rings.
An other option is to replace the bottom piece of glass with anti-NR
glass though some seem to believe this will cause a loss of
resolution.
I wouldn't suggest this approach. Take a look at your AN glass under a
loupe and you'll know why.

Regards,

Neil
 
Neil Gould said:
I wouldn't suggest this approach. Take a look at your AN glass under a
loupe and you'll know why.

I'll second this. I think Nikon knows what they are doing in not using AN
glass for the lower glass. (But I'm not going to say this on the Nikon list,
since it's dense of loud folks who think it's a good idea<g>.)

What I'd really like is no lower glass at all and a metal (or rigid plastic)
frame that the AN glass would push down on.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
 
David said:
I'll second this. I think Nikon knows what they are doing in not using AN
glass for the lower glass. (But I'm not going to say this on the Nikon list,
since it's dense of loud folks who think it's a good idea<g>.)

What I'd really like is no lower glass at all and a metal (or rigid plastic)
frame that the AN glass would push down on.

That would be best indeed.
 
Back
Top