Ken writes:
> How did the 300mm/f4.5 w/ zuiko 2X converter seem? Did it seem sharp and
> did they they produce high quality image?
>
> I use this combo occasionally and it seems to work well. I wonder why OLY
> doesn't specifically recommend this combo.
I haven't had time to do the projected evaluations yet, but: The overall
results with the 2X were worse than expected. I'm going to have my first F
rating: the 100mm f/2.8 w/ 2X at f/2.8 (5.6 effective). The 300mm f/4.5 w/ 2x
at f/4.5 (f/9 effective) and f/5.6 (f/11 effective) are probably also an F. I
can't really guess on the others but there seems to be a little improvement
upon stopping down. My conclusion - risking getting flamed - is that I'm glad
I never invested in a 2X. Plus, focusing with it is a "Hail Mary" operation
because you are relying on viewing (at full aperture) a darkened and very
aberration degraded image.
I used a massive unextended tripod on the 300mm w/ 2X and a weighted tripod on
the 100mm. Joel Wilcox might be onto something with his recommendation that a
telephoto lens be supported with a tripod arm. I think that lenses with focal
lengths from 150mm and up that rely only on the tripod socket of an OM body
are not all that stable, even when the mirror is locked up (I used an OM-1n)
and a long cable release used. How else can one explain that a 100-200mm f/5
Zuiko can be sharper at 400mm (with a 2X converter) than at 200mm (without a
converter), considering that only at 400mm did I prop up the lens hood with
another tripod?
I suspect the 85-250mm f/5 Zuiko would perform great on a tripod because it
comes with a tripod collar that balances the weight. The 50-250mm f/5 lacks
one and might suffer for it.
Telephoto unsteadiness on a tripod might just be the price we pay for
lightweight, petite construction of the OM bodies. Olympus admitted it in
their SIF for the 200mm f/5, which reads:
"Also, to prevent camera shake: when using a tripod, hold the camera steady
with both hands and press the shutter release with the ball of the finger, not
with the cable release."
Does this possible unsteadiness make the tests unreliable? Well, I took extra
precautions to make the setup steady, but not extraordinary precautions (like
Joel's supporting arm). I suspect extra precautions equals the typically
technique we as photographers use. Thus the tests reflect normal shooting
conditions, even if the test target is rather non-normal for most folks.
BTW, I looked under an 8X loupe at the 200mm f/4 SC vs. MC results. Virtually
indistinguishable. Looks like I'll need to test that lens for a 4th time,
this time with a lens support arm, which is going on my personal "want list."
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< 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 >
|