Olaf Greve wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > There is a way around it though. Recall months back - Jan
> > Steinman removed the tabs from the back of his 90 macro so that it would
> > mate with the doubler. I did the same thing to mine and it could surely
> be
> > done to the 65-200.
>
> Interesting... So I guess "removing" does indeed mean "philing" ?
Ooops, I just looked at my 65-200. It's plenty different that the 90
macro. Indeed, you're right, it looks like filing would be the way to
do it. Don't blame ya for feeling uncomfortable with that. Course, if
you could get that ring with the tabs out and file it on a bench ....
>
> I tried the 65-200/4 on a cheapo Vivitar 2x TC and it looked like a very
> nice zoom range (130-400/8), so I'm very tempted to "make it work" with the
> Oly 2xA too, however, I don't like the idea of philing these protrusions
> away, though...
>
I had a Tokina 7-element 2X. I used it on the 65-200. I wouldn't
recommend it. Sold my T-2X.
George
< 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 >
|