That surely explains why Olympus says the OM 300mm 4,5 isn't
"compatible" with the E-series... it is good! why don't they make an
AF version of this lens for fourthirds?
Something I observed is that, when I use my OM lenses with the Digital
1,4 TC the results are better. Might have to do with a better light
baffle and less internal reflections. The 100f2 is a very fine example
of this effect. I once thought of inserting a standard baffle in the
OM adapter but time's too short.
Iwert.
2007/2/12, Jan Steinman <Jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> Lenses tested:
> •Soligor 180mm ƒ3.5 T-mount
> •Zuiko 180mm ƒ2.8
> •Tamron 300mm ƒ2.8
> •Zuiko 300mm ƒ4.5
> •Vivitar 500mm ƒ8 macro mirror
> •Zuiko 500mm ƒ8 Reflex
> •Zuiko 600mm ƒ6.5
> •Bausch & Lomb 800mm ƒ10 mirror
> •Celestron C90 1000mm ƒ11 mirror
> •Olympus 1.4X-A teleconverter
> •Olympus 2X-A teleconverter
>
> http://www.bytesmiths.com/OM_Tele
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|