06-21-2012, 07:12 PM
Hi Pierre,
[quote name='Pierre Poulin' timestamp='1340296047' post='19014']
Wim,
I don't think it's fair to conclude that this particular converter (Lumix DMW-GWC1)
is an aftertought just because it came to market after the two lenses it works with.
It might have been engineered in the lens design from the beginning.
It'd then be normal to bring it to market later when there's sufficient lenses out there.
-----------------------------------------------
Quote :"As to how well it works: it will never work as well as a decent prime lens of the resulting FL, not even with a specific, dediated attachment, for the simple reason that it is an afterthought and therefore not an optimal solution for a specific FL.
Kind regards, Wim "
[/quote]
It is an afterthought by definition. It wasn't meant in a derogatory manner. The thing is though, that the lenses it works with are specifically designed for a purpose. The WA converter is an add-on, which essentially "distorts" the working of these lenses, to say so, and in itself adds non-optimized optical performance to another lens. In a way it is like using a close-up lens. They are afterthought lenses, and there are simple, single lens design ones, and more complex, achromatic options. Although one gets good results with the achromatic options, the results are not as good as with dedicated macrolenses. However, it is a much cheaper option, and you are likely to get 80% or more of the performance of a dedicated lens.
It is the same with these multi-element WA converters. They can be fairly good, but never as good as a lens optimized for the AoV that it plus a lens it is mounted to can provide. This plus the fact that it is an add-on lens, makes it an afterthought to me.
HTH, kind regards, Wim
[quote name='Pierre Poulin' timestamp='1340296047' post='19014']
Wim,
I don't think it's fair to conclude that this particular converter (Lumix DMW-GWC1)
is an aftertought just because it came to market after the two lenses it works with.
It might have been engineered in the lens design from the beginning.
It'd then be normal to bring it to market later when there's sufficient lenses out there.
-----------------------------------------------
Quote :"As to how well it works: it will never work as well as a decent prime lens of the resulting FL, not even with a specific, dediated attachment, for the simple reason that it is an afterthought and therefore not an optimal solution for a specific FL.
Kind regards, Wim "
[/quote]
It is an afterthought by definition. It wasn't meant in a derogatory manner. The thing is though, that the lenses it works with are specifically designed for a purpose. The WA converter is an add-on, which essentially "distorts" the working of these lenses, to say so, and in itself adds non-optimized optical performance to another lens. In a way it is like using a close-up lens. They are afterthought lenses, and there are simple, single lens design ones, and more complex, achromatic options. Although one gets good results with the achromatic options, the results are not as good as with dedicated macrolenses. However, it is a much cheaper option, and you are likely to get 80% or more of the performance of a dedicated lens.
It is the same with these multi-element WA converters. They can be fairly good, but never as good as a lens optimized for the AoV that it plus a lens it is mounted to can provide. This plus the fact that it is an add-on lens, makes it an afterthought to me.
HTH, kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....