On Tue, 8 Feb 2000, george wrote:
|John
|
|I tested the 90/2 + 1.7x IS-3 converter for Gary. The results are on
|the site. Professional? I dunno. But it had mostly 'B's and the couple
|of slides I took with it in Hawaii looked pretty darn good.
|
|It fared **far** better than the 90 + Zuiko 2X combo. And it's about 1
|1/3 stops faster. I wish I had never modified my 90 to mate with the 2X,
|and I would recommend against anyone doing it.
Thanks, George. I didn't realize Gary tested the combo. I just
fishing for more ways to get a medium tele macro lens.
I believe someone indicated earlier (you, perhaps) that you lose only
2/3 stops with the 90/2 + 1.7X. If so, this yields a 153/2.5
macro---not bad at all! I also own the Vivitar 2X macro TC which
isn't too bad with the 90/2, but anything which raises the quality bar
of the final image is preferred. Besides, a 153/2.5 tele can be
useful for low light work. For those with the 100/2, adding the 1.7X
yields a 170/2.5 telephoto lens.
|"John A. Prosper" wrote:
|>
|> For those of you who have used the 90/2 or 100/2 with the B-300
|> "teleconverter", is this a professionally sharp combo?
|>
|> How about using the IS3 0.8X wide angle converter with the 35/2? with
|> the 24/2? with the 21/2? Is there vignetting with the 24/2 or 21/2?
|>
|> < 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 >
|
|
< 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 >
|