>> I think it has to do with whether your teleconverter goes in front of the
>> lens or behind it. ;-)
I was intersted by this discussion given Oly's revival of the
'supplementary' or 'auxilliary' lens for the IS models. This technique was
once common with fixed lens cameras - I have a set to go with an old
Yashica Electro and found a set of Yashica auxilliary tele lenses to fit a
friend's Yashicamat 6x6 TLR the other day. Some people love the old
Spiratone 'fish-eye' converters although quality is marginal.
My local pawnbroker type stores (Cash Converters) always seem to have screw
in wide and tele supplementary lenses for videocams, often in useable
filter mounts around 52/55/series VII sizes. How good or bad are these?
Anyone played with them? Are there good and bad brands - they seem to have
names like Vitacon which I've never heard of! How do they compare with
coventional teleconvertors?
I assume that as they're for video cameras, the quality doesn't have to be
as good as for still photography.
regards
Andrew
< 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 >
|