On 1/28/2025 4:12 PM, usher99--- via olympus wrote:
<<Really? Perhaps only at longer FLs? I seem to recall checking, and finding not a shield
in the <<way, but glass right back at the rear end; no room for the TC protrusion.
A simple hack and have to have the PL 100-400 FL >200--same with ver 2 of the lens
though it appears exif is correct with ver 2 as expected but not with ver1 of course.
Optical formulae are the same. They should have made ver 1 the same.
That just wouldn't fly for me. Juggling body, lens and TC with no place to put anything down, and often enough, wind,
dust, etc. is something I won't do.
Sheesh, I even carry two bodies around my neck much of the time, to avoid the time and trouble of lens switches. "Oops,
the light's changed, subject moved, etc."
Oly is modestly sharper wide open at all FL's but is just too big for me.
13% heavier. 4% fatter, 20% longer (mostly for TC clearance?) I'm not sure that, in the field, I could tell the weight
and girth differences. It does have a much less appealing tripod mount. But, since I quit using tripods except at home,
I'm not sure where it is, anyway.
Yeah, I'd prefer to be using a GX9 and PL 100-400, ergonomically, but that
won't do what this will.
Ver 2 does not allow any TC unless FL put in appropriate position.
https://youtu.be/fZU56AyikVY?si=m-csTJGQ1hdAvz73
Space, weight limits for travel, Mike
Ah well, my two body, 12-200 and 100-400+TC combo has traveled for 6-8 weeks, both sides of the Atlantic the last two
falls, so I'm good.
Jettison Something Else Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|