On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
There is a larger image with the thing-a-ma-jiggie here:
<http://www.imaging-resource.com/NPICS1/OLYMPUS_ESYSTEM_GROUP_1_H.JPG>
Still can't tell for sure what it is or if it has an optical element.
There seems to be a bit more detail in this photo. From it you can see that
the little gold tabs at the 7 o'clock position are actually behind and below
the surface of the mount, and it appears there is a series of them. The
diameter of the element also appears to be too small to accomodate the
size of the large rear element of the 50/1.2 lens. Perhaps this is just
a teleconverter of some sort. Why would an OM converter need electrical
contacts on the OM side of it?
-mark
Well, it is a bit hard to understand the marketing logic of issuing a
600mm equiv. lens and a teleconverter. Neither one is a big seller
in the grand scheme of things. But an extension tube for the macro
to give it a one to one ratio makes more sense to me.
I just looked at my 25 mm extension tube and set it down on the table
with the lens mount up and it looked amazingly like the picture. The
mounting ring is significantly larger than the thing on the other end
that goes into the mount on the camera. An automatic extension ring
on an autofocus camera might need contacts.
The one ray of hope for me is that the Olympus people did not answer
the Belgian reporter's question as to whether the mount would fit an
OM lens. I think almost every camera manufacturer, except Nikon and
Pentax maybe, which has gone from manual to autofocus has increased
the size of the lens mount. So an auto-everything digital camera for
a 4/3 chip might conceivably need a lens mount the size of the manual
OM mount.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
Don't anthropomorphize computers. They hate that.
< 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 >
|
