Hm. Really? It might be too good to be true.
I had a sharp look at the OM mount in my OM bodies, in an auto ext tube and an
2x converter. Then I cropped the E-system picture, resampled it by factor 4,
applied Gaussian blur and USM. This gave slightly "more" information.
There is something missing: The lever to transmit the aperture to the camera.
Either the E-system does not have this (it may have an electronic aperture
instead) and lenses miss the auto aperture, or it is not an OM-E adaptor.
But the arrangement, location and size of the bajonet looks like with the OM
mount and a primitive comparision of the bajonet diameter and flange size tell
the same.
Does anybody have pictures of the E-bajonet on an E-lens? It would be
interesting to compare the lens side also.
Exciting!
Bernd
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jez.Cunningham@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Is it an OM adapter?
> Skip said: It HAS to be the OM-System adapter. At least it exists.
>
> So let's make 03/03/03 the date we celebrate as the first day of the rest
> of the life of OM!
> Zuikoholics rejoice! Crack tubes! (for Ozzie friends)
> Jez
>
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|