Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 2 XA Converter and 200/4 'false recall' question

Subject: Re: [OM] 2 XA Converter and 200/4 'false recall' question
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 17:12:47 -0700
NSURIT@xxxxxxx wrote:

In a message dated 5/31/2003 8:40:26 AM Central Standard Time, fgnzalez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

I'm now quite surprised that the resources I consulted, including the description sheet inside the box, does include the /4. Isn't this good news?



According to the Olympus Sales Information File (a dealer reference, the publication date which is unknown) it was suitable for the 100mm f2.8, 135mm f2.8, 135mm f3.5, 200mm f4 and the 100-200mm zoom. Bill Barber

The reason the SIF doesn't have a pub date is that, like many similar dealer pubs, it was a loose leaf file, individual pages of which were updated as necessary, both to correct errors and to include new information. When I worked in electronics, I spent some time each week updating the sales reference books. Thus you could run across one copy with one set of info and another with another, depending on when each stopped being updated. Hans' eSIF shows all the lenses you list plus the 200/5 and 50-250/5. I think he went ot a lot of effort to gat the latest pages for his eSIF.

Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote

> Well, I have my 2XA in front of me. Serial Nº111444 (nice number, eh?) It too has engraved around the circumference near the rear thusly: 100mm F2.8 135mm F2.8 135mm F3.5 200mm F4 200mm F5. BUT it does not mention the 100-200/5. Neither does its instruction sheet. BUT the OM4 brochure lens chart, reproduced in the Olympus Sales Information File at http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/esif/om-sif/lensgroup.htm doesmention the 100-200. What a mess, isn't it.

Not really, see above. All the parts of the Oly system were not all produced at 
once, they came into being, and some were phased out, over a 2+ decade period. 
If you read literture, instruction sheets, etc. produced before another part of 
the system existed, it is not supriseing that it isn't mentioned.

I don't doubt more than acceptable results with many lenses not listed as recommended. Indeed. like Walt, I try it on non listed and non-Oly lenses to make sure there is no mechanical conflict and try it out of it fits.


This lack of synchronization is also true of markings on equipment. Walt's 2X-A lists "100mm F2.8 135mm F2.8 135mm F3.5 200mm F4 200mm F5 100-200mm F5", while mine, like yours, lists all of those except the 100-200. Most of the rubber clamp-on lens caps for the 'standard' 50mm lenses list the 50/1.8 & 1.4 and the 35/3.5. Later ones produced after the introduction of the 40/2 also list that lens in the raised markings in the rubber. Early 65-116s only have repro ratio markings for the 80/4 and 135/4.5. Later production after the introduction ot the shorter auto-macros, have markings for them as well. Guess what? The earlier versions of all of these work identically to the later versions, they just aren't marked the same.

Moose






< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz