Exactly the reason I never upgraded -- I think the behavior at iso 400 is better in the new version, though.
Niels
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
great converter for z38 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter scary-canary
- Start date
Exactly the reason I never upgraded -- I think the behavior at iso 400 is better in the new version, though.
Niels
I also prefer the EVF on my FZ8. But I admit that I have gotten used to the one of my FZ35 to the point where I find it usable at least.
Wildmoreway
Well-known member
They can be found on ebay
ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110555948235&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110555948235&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT
It also needed a 58 to 46 step down ring that I bought s/h from LCE
My set up is working ok and use of the extension does also make it easier to hold the camera steady. Also the ring doeas allow you to use Raynox snap on macro adaptors
ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110555948235&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110555948235&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT
It also needed a 58 to 46 step down ring that I bought s/h from LCE
My set up is working ok and use of the extension does also make it easier to hold the camera steady. Also the ring doeas allow you to use Raynox snap on macro adaptors
Apparently, the objective diameter has been reduced in the FZ35/38. Usually, it is rather the other way around. In this case, the FZ35/38 has a 46 mm thread and thus does not need a step-down ring. But there is not enough space around the lens barrel for the two releasing knobs on the side. The overall diameter over these knobs is 54 mm, and they get stuck when the lens is retracted. Thus, a 58 mm set-up would be of even less use in my case. If anything, I'd need extension rings of 46 mm diameter.
But I still have a question about your set-up. Does the extension ring still allow you to focus to infinity? I recall from my analog cameras that the extension rings allowed closer macro pictures, but at the cost of losing the possibility to focus at the long-distance side. In fact, I wonder why you should have a retraction problem in the first place with that wider barrel.
46 mm tubes are also available though a bit more expensive, e.g. here: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/46mm-PANASONI...raphy_DigitalCamAccess_RL&hash=item562b821e7d
So my question about your system is more than just academic.
Last edited:
Robert, I think you are misunderstanding something. On my FZ18, there is a thread on the lens itself, but also one on the barrel around that lens, the part that is shorter than the lens itself when the camera is on. This looks like an extension ring to screw into that outer barrel, not into the lens.
The converter can clip into the lens itself, but will then try to retract into that barrel when the lens retracts, causing problems. The extension tube of the barrel will have the large diameter, so you need the step down ring to fit the converter.
Niels
The converter can clip into the lens itself, but will then try to retract into that barrel when the lens retracts, causing problems. The extension tube of the barrel will have the large diameter, so you need the step down ring to fit the converter.
Niels
Wildmoreway
Well-known member
This teleconverter was designed to fit the likes of the Olympus 770 and differs from the TCon17 that is mentioned here, there was also an alternative TCon17 that had the smaller fitment, for the 770 etc... I did have one at one stage but lost it :C
This is a completely new version as far as I knew it then. I have known such a system to work for filters and the like, but not for converters. So far, I thought any converter had to be fixed to the objective so that it moves with it , i.e. that it maintains the distance between the lenses. As the lens barrel is moving back and forth while zooming, such a constant distance to the converter lens is no longer given with the presently discussed set-up. Can such a system really work?
Musoman
PETE - Nikon/Sony Shooter
For anyone wanting a 14, its worth pointing out that the top of the tree was the 14B pro. These were expensive when released..something like £250 ( vague memory ) but around that mark, and i think the thread mounts on the lower spec glass ( 14 , 14C etc ) were maybe different
The 14B pro has a 62mm mount so goes straight on to the Pemeraal FZ18 adapter, as in photos i've posted
Attachments
Musoman
PETE - Nikon/Sony Shooter
Wildmoreway
Well-known member
The packaging lists the WHE Olympus converter as being for the 1400/2500/1000/2000/2500 all fairly early cameras from around 1998 to 2001. the ox shows it as the TCON-14, I suspect that the glass is the same as in the later converters (14B/14C) and that it is the filter mount size that been changed to allow it to be fitted more easily to later cameras. I think the original cost back then was over £200.
Musoman
PETE - Nikon/Sony Shooter
The 14b was for E 10 series, the 14 for C 2500L, C 1400XL ,
C 1400L, C 1000L , C 2000 zoom. The 14d was only for the C 8080
The Glass in the the 14b was possibly superior than the other 14 TC's, as it used 5 elements in 3 groups as opposed to 3 elements in 2 groups. Possibly why it was called the pro model as it was built for the higher ended cameras
C 1400L, C 1000L , C 2000 zoom. The 14d was only for the C 8080
The Glass in the the 14b was possibly superior than the other 14 TC's, as it used 5 elements in 3 groups as opposed to 3 elements in 2 groups. Possibly why it was called the pro model as it was built for the higher ended cameras
scary-canary
Canaries forever... and i'm not always scary, some
Although I still think it's good - does anyone else think the converter takes some of the sharpness away from the pictures? Even when focused my pictures lack the sharpness I want (and seem to get from the camera without the converter). Thoughts please...
