Bernard Frangoulis wrote:
>The problem with the Zuiko 1.4x, besides the rather high price, is that it
>does not fit all lenses.
>
That's sort of a good news - bad news "problem" Third party makers have
to make their converters compatibile with a wide range of lenses. Oly
took the course of designing the 1.4x just for their longer lenses. The
result was a design optimized for certain optical criteria. Part of that
was putting the front elements of the converter as close to the rear
elements of the prime lens.
The good news is that the Zuiko 1.4x is apparently superior to all
others. Walt reports it is better than the Tamron SP 1.4x, which had the
same advantage of being designed only to fit their own adaptall lenses,
but fits most of them.
The bad news is that it doesn't fit all the lenses we might like it to fit.
The news is similar for the Zuiko 2x. It won't fit some lenses I might
wish it would fit. For example, the Tamron adaptall 2x SP converter
makes their 90/2.5 lens into an excellent 180/5 macro with focusing from
infinity to 1:1. I have the Zuiko 90/2 and the 2xA and was frustrated
that a boss on the back of the 90/2 prevents it from fitting on the 2xA.
However, Gary tested this combo with a 90/2 physically modified to fit
the 2xA. The results were terrible. Again, Oly has created a lens
optimized for limited uses.
>For instance I could not use it with my 135/2.8, making a very compact 200/4
>
Maybe now you know why.
> for my "light travel" Domke bag. That's why I was
>wondering if other 1.5x converters were any
>better: Kenko, Kiron, Soligor... - anybody has
>tested them?
>
The Kiron 1.5x vignettes on the 300/4.5. Ok for many shots which may be
cropped, but not a general purpose solution. I haven't tried it on
shorter lenses.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|