On 7/6/2022 3:35 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
Really not trying to be opaque in any way. The differences between the PL
100-400 (Panny-Leica) and the MZ 100-400 should be of general interest.
The Pentax close up (CU) diopter T132 really performs remarkably well on the PL
100-400 and the MZ but any performance differences at higher mags for small
butterflies is not clear.
It is very difficult to predict how an achromatic CU diopter will behave on a
given lens.
Ever so true. once the Nikons were discontinued (although easily available), John Shaw changed his recommendation to the
Canon 500D.
Not terrible on the PL 100-400, but significantly less sharp than the T132. I
returned the Canon.
On paper, the Sigma Achromatic Macro Lens AML 72-01 should be a good match for the Oly 12-200. Soft City. T132, nice and
sharp.
And so on. Why? Dunno, and so it goes . . .
That, and general foolishness, are why I have 15 different Achromatic C-U lenses. Some will never find a match, but I
can't know which beforehand. So far, the winners are Pentax T132, Nikon 5T, Oly MCON-P02 and Oly B-Macro H.Q. Converter
f=40cm. Oh yeah, the Minolta No 0 on Panny ZS200 with special filter thread adapter.
Endless Combinations 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/
|