Dharma Singh wrote:
> 2008/2/18, Piers Hemy <piers@xxxxxxxx>:
>
>> ..... and would gladly get my hands on either of the macro converters.
>>
> I'll will gladly send you one of them, but I don't know whether it's
> worth the s&h.
>
Should be worth it for the macro converters. They are better optically
than the earlier ones made for the OM mount lenses. The OM versions are
single element, while the iS/L A and B are two element achromats. If you
look at the prices of the Canon and Nikon 2-element close-up lenses, you
will see the value.
I have the A and B versions, but not the three element "A - Life Size
Macro?" one. Really no point, as I have plenty of true macro lenses.
> As I know little about digital cameras the question popped up because there
> are converters avaible I think for the E10 and I really don't know whether
> they are in essence very different from the iS/L ones.
>
All converter lenses are the same in principal, the differences are in
the details. There have been generic ones for many decades. One designed
specifically for one lens may work with another, may vignette or may
have lesser optical results. There is really no way to know without
trying it out.
Canon, for example, has a whole bunch of different WA and tele
converters for many of their digicams, with each pair recommended for
some subset of all their cameras that can mount converters.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|