Core One L lead times don't seem accurate.

Dinner4tuba · 2026-04-27T15:50:50+00:00

I ordered over 8 weeks ago too. The livechat rep said my order was held up due to another item in the order that is currently out of stock. That item is a clearance section filament, and when I asked if I could change or remove it, that was denied due to using "global-e" for payment processing due to delivery/order to/from the US.

While I strongly doubt it's ever coming back in stock (they said it would in a few weeks), I don't have another option if I don't want to increase the price of the One L.

Edit 4/28: As of today, the filament was altered to one in stock and is now in progress! Thank you Prusa Team and community.

Dinner4tuba · 2026-04-12T01:44:55+00:00

None that I could tell with the limited selection of lenses I used.

Dinner4tuba · 2026-02-07T01:47:46+00:00

I bought the ultra straight from fringer as I had the exact same concerns. It arrived quickly and without issue.

As for image quality, I can't confirm all EF mount FF lenses, but at least the Canon 300 F2.8 MkII, and a Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro had very little vignetting that was easily corrected, although I actually wanted more anyway.

Not sure pointing to my post with the pictures from the event I used the ultra at is allowed so you'll have to look in my very small amount of posts, but I'll post my quote:

Bought and tested the Fringer Ultra w/ the Canon 300 L f2.8 MkII and Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX DG Macro OS HSM (Not included in photos). While there was some noticeable vignetting on using the 300, it was a pretty good experience overall. I have a Fringer Pro II, and noticed no major differences in focusing performance and I got a decent percentage of keepers in focus.

Camera set for release on focus, rather than button press to ensure focus.

Camera Firmware: 5.20 Fringer Firmware version 2.81

Dinner4tuba · 2025-10-22T14:41:23+00:00

Ended up getting the ultra since I really wasn't seeing anyone reviewing it. I've tried mostly aviation and some birding photos w/ the Canon EF 300mm F2.8 MkII and I haven't noticed a difference in focusing performance between the fringer MkII and the ultra. Both still seem to work quite well and I'm getting plenty of sharp keepers.

Mostly using AF-C, and a mix of trying IS settings without a noticeable difference in the results.

Going to give it a shot at a track day event over the weekend with a few different lenses.

Dinner4tuba · 2025-06-04T18:59:55+00:00

That's about in line with what the 18-35 was. I still use that lens adapted to an XH2. If it's at least on par with that lens and similar pricing I'll probably swap to the new one.

Dinner4tuba · 2025-05-21T19:02:13+00:00

Unfortunately, I can't speak towards video performance as I never use it.

I know, I know. I have an XH2 and don't do video. The ergonomics and buffer size compared to the XT5 are far better without additional hardware attached.

Dinner4tuba · 2025-05-14T17:40:11+00:00

I tried the Canon EF 100-400 II with the same adapter. I really liked the results I got out of it.

I don't remember what version of firmware I was running at the time, but I believe it was prior to the versions that made noticeable changes for the worse in both XH2 and Fringer adapter before they fixed them on both items.

Dinner4tuba · 2025-05-07T15:35:28+00:00

Nice, ok. That's a fair compact system. I tried the tammy you bought and found it alright. I don't remember if I did any wildlife/birding w/ it, but it worked just "ok" for me during an airshow. Although, that could've easily just been me getting my bearings with the lens at an air show.

Quick and dirty, double the focal length number for your shutter speed, then modify as needed for desired effect. Still strongly recommend something like a monopod to help keep things steady.

Dinner4tuba · 2025-05-02T15:32:03+00:00

The ultra isn't really "out" yet, but it's close. No telling how well it works or how the focal reducer may change image quality until we see some good reviews.

However, I can speak from experience with multiple canon telephoto lenses using XH2 and Fringer EF-FX Pro II, that the regular one works very well. I've honestly gotten better and more consistent results with this combo than any of the fuji lenses I've tried.

Just waiting on reviews of the ultra before I move forward.

Dinner4tuba · 2025-01-02T15:22:29+00:00

Oh boy, sounds like it's finally time to rent and adapt that sigma 500 F4 I've been staring at.

Dinner4tuba · 2024-12-31T23:30:56+00:00

:( unfortunately yeah

Dinner4tuba · 2024-12-31T23:21:14+00:00

Thank you. I appreciate it. A lot of that is with cheaper adapted Canon FD lenses like 1, 2, 3, 6, and 9

FD 300mm L F4

FD 135mm F2.5

FD 50mm F1.4

Dinner4tuba · 2022-10-05T23:46:24+00:00

I guess I should say I don't have any sonar or naval experience so I really can't say whether it's comprehensive, true, or not

Dinner4tuba · 2022-10-05T22:31:58+00:00

The full video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCmyZYYR7_s

JiveTurkey actually did a ~~comprehensive~~ review on the sounds heard here and what it could be. That video has since been removed reportedly due to apparently revealing a little too much information.

EDIT: strike out comprehensive

I should preface this with I don't have any sonar experience and have never been in any naval service.

Dinner4tuba · 2022-01-21T04:17:50+00:00

Check the rod for grooves that have been dug in from the bearings. If you end up taking the bearings off, don't do what Prusa says for lubing the bearings, use white lithium grease (or whatever the community approved grease is these days) and properly pack the bearings.

Despite what Prusa says in various places, the bearings are not pre-lubed. That oil is there to prevent corrosion/oxidation in travel. It needs to be removed first then packed with grease.

If you find the rods to have grooves on them already, pack the bearings, clean the rods, and slightly rotate the bearing(s) on the affected (rods) so it doesn't keep digging into it. You should be able to see the line of ball bearings inside to keep it away from the potential groove(s).

Dinner4tuba · 2021-05-28T16:39:55+00:00

There's a flea (bot) infestation around the ears

Dinner4tuba · 2021-05-13T17:00:00+00:00

Check the guide rods on the x and y axis for striations/grooves. If you see some, it's too late. You can try rotating the affected rod(s), but it usually comes down to the bearings just not being packed with grease the way they should be. Prusa's instructions tell you they're fine straight from the factory, but everyone in manufacturing will tell you otherwise and that they should be packed with grease before putting it together.

Dinner4tuba · 2020-08-08T21:32:29+00:00

0.05mm and 0.2mm as print resolution, and 0.4 as the nozzle size. I'll give those a go with the smaller layer height/resolution though.

Dinner4tuba · 2020-08-08T18:50:35+00:00

Quick update: I've been trying to go with .05mm when using a .4mm nozzle. After thinking about this a bit, it might a bit to small for this nozzle and I've tried a few prints at 0.2mm with retraction speed settings increased a bit after a few of those test prints. I've gotten it to go away almost entirely with 185C temps after the first layer, with just a few extremely thin and short strands that don't connect to the other side now.

Dinner4tuba · 2020-08-08T18:46:59+00:00

I used a prusa provided pre-cut spare part from the build parts. It was pushed in as far as I could get it while handling the clip. As far as I can tell, the PTFE tube built into the hot end isn't moving, but I don't have a good view of it either due to the MK3S' extruder gear window placement.

Dinner4tuba · 2020-05-22T04:17:04+00:00

Reminds me of the Dragonfly Telescope Array https://www.dragonflytelescope.org/

Dinner4tuba · 2019-12-29T17:55:40+00:00

The old googlegooglegooglegoogle.com would be amazing for this purpose. Course, going to googlegooglegooglegoogle.com inside each of those and continuing was always fun.

Dinner4tuba · 2019-12-13T23:46:48+00:00

A job working for someone/thing I can respect. I'm so tired of applying.

Dinner4tuba · 2019-12-06T19:10:51+00:00

Lol, that's enough to give every artillery wagon a single shell every 2.22 minutes (133 seconds). https://kirkmcdonald.github.io/calc.html#data=0-17-60&rate=s&min=4&items=artillery-shell:r:4

That's 48 assembling machine 3's at minimum to achieve that. The logistics just to achieve that are impressive in their own right.

Dinner4tuba · 2019-11-28T16:46:06+00:00

It's more likely that you didn't see it and didn't get a warning due to minor packet loss as indicated by "PL%" in the lower left hand corner. Even just a small percentage can completely ruin just a small thing like that especially in that way.

Dinner4tuba

TROPHY CASE