I've got a Tiffen 2X telephoto converter that fits my little C-2000 Z. It
produces excellent results. I can discern no difference in sharpness,
resolution or color between photographs made with and without it. The only
difference is the degree of magnification.
However, since it IS a digital camera, nothing's ever really sharp anyway, and
since it's just 2MP, there's not much resolution of detail either, so this
teleconverter may actually be junk.
Just kidding, digitheads. Loosen up that hold on your knickers. I'm only
rattling your cages. Can't resist sometimes.
Actually, the C-2000 Z represents one of the best things I ever bought. It's
good enough for quite acceptable 5x7 in. prints, even 8x10s, and it's satisfied
my digital yearning enough that I haven't wasted money on some intermediate
equivalent of a Yugo and am quite content and comfortable waiting for something
REALLY good to come along. Meanwhile, it's the family snapshot camera, and the
OM and MF stuff keeps me occupied using film and taking real photographs.
Walt
--
"Anything more than 500 yards from
the car just isn't photogenic." --
Edward Weston
-------------- Original message from Jim Brokaw : --------------
> The TCON-17 sounds a lot like the 1.7x made for the IS-3 and similar
> cameras. That converter has 55mm threads, and is a bit big and heavy for the
> C2020-Z that I have... it has 'extra' glass in the front to somewhat
> compensate for the light lost to the magnification. As a 'matched' add-on
> for the IS cameras this appears to work pretty well, and of course the TTL
> exposure compensates for any slight light lost. I notice that when I use the
> 1.7x on the front of the 135/2.8 Zuiko the exposure as metered by the OM-4T
> shows some light loss... probably just noticable due to the meter readout
> making it visible... seems like about 1/3 to 1/2 stop, less than might be
> 'expected' for 1.7x magnification... you wind up with about a 230/3.5 or so.
>
> Adapters added onto the front of the lens usually cause minimal light loss,
> compared with the light loss of a teleconverter mounted between lens and
> camera body (which of course won't work with the fixed lens digicams...).
> Quality seems to be pretty close in the case of the Olympus-brand front of
> the lens converters.
> --
>
> Jim Brokaw
> OM-'s of all sorts, and no OM-oney...
>
> on 8/27/04 4:36 PM, Joel Wilcox at jowilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > Thanks buddy. I have noticed little light loss (under tungsten light, 1/20
> > sec difference), but the TCON-17C is unlike anything I've ever seen
> > before. I suppose it's closest to a diopter. To use it:
> >
> > 1) remove any UV filter etc. from the lens
> > 2) screw in an adapter into the housing around the lens
> > 3) mount the TCON into the adapter with a bayonet-style mount
> >
> > When you turn the C-5060 on, you have to make sure to zoom to the long
> > end. I've probably made it sound like a ritual to use, and I suppose it
> > is, but it's welcome if you need the reach. Only show in town.
> >
> > The TCON-17C seems very cheaply made, "floater" materials. :( Most
> > un-Zuiko-like. But I can't yet see a falloff in quality, so the glass must
> > be OK.
> >
> > Joel W.
> >
> > At 06:04 PM 8/27/2004 +0100, you wrote:
> >
> >> Pretty lovely photo Joel! Do you lose much light with a TCON?
> >>
> >> Chris
> >> On 27 Aug 2004, at 12:54, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> >>
> >>> http://soli.inav.net/~jdub/day/day15.html
> >>>
> >>> Joel W.
> >> <|_:-)_|>
> >>
> >> C M I Barker
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|