Panasonic wide angle adapter vs Olympus 9mm Fisheye Body Cap

I've got the 9mm BC but not the converter. Though I did follow a number of threads on that converter and others awhile back.

The BC is surprisingly good for what it is. If you do get it be aware that turning on lateral CA correction in your RAW converter will improve the corners from awful to sort of ugly - it has a lot of CA but fortunately that is easily corrected. The BC will be smaller and lighter than the converter.

It has been awhile since looking into the converters but my impression was that if you were doing landscapes where you often care about edge sharpness to that the converter is going to perform better at the edges. There were a few threads at DPR awhile back comparing the Panasonic and a variety of other converters. The Panasonic when attached to the 14/2.5 it is meant to be used on did quite well as I recall.

 

Hi

well I don't have the body cap but the basic maths will tell you that its
1) a Diffraction Limited system (meaning that its never going to give the clarity that a lens will)
2) limited to f8 therefore: ok in full sunlight, complete crap in a dimly lit (say cathedral) interior. Something like the image below would be more or less impossible

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

3) you don't need to change lenses (if that means anything to you ...) just add on the adapter which you can then pop back into a pocket ...

IFF you already have the 14mm then its a no brainer ... get the GWC-1 .. its fantastic for the money.

I used to use the Olympus 9-18mm (the 43rds one as I started using it on an adapter well before there was a native m43 option). After I bought the GWC1 I was so please I sold the 9-18 and never looked back

well that's those boxes ticked ...

Here is the angle of view differences between 9mm - Adapted 14mm - 14mm

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

If you buy one, get it from a lad that sells on eBay from Japan. The one he sent me had a lens cap and the one I've bought earlier (and all the ones I've ever seen) have no lens cap.

from my blog
http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2013/10/panasonic-079-wide-adaptor-on-14mm.html
http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2013/10/panasonic-079-adapter-on-camera.html
and this post shows the new cap
http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2014/12/thank-you-panasonic.html

The eBay seller I used is this guy

Having lived in Japan for some years I find them one of the most trustworthy peoples to do business with.

 

I don't know .. all I know is that as I said its the 9-18mm 43rds zoom ... if you went to the blog post you'd see this image of it on the adapter

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I hope that narrows down which it is for you

 

I own both -- Similar to GWC-1, I used a Nikon WA converter with both my 17 f/1.8 and 14/2.5. A converter is sharper than the body cap, but I also like the fisheye effect of the body cap for landscapes. If I hike, I carry the body cap with my 14-54 and 70-300. This way, I'm covered all the way from Fisheye UWA to super telephoto. If I plan to do night scapes, then I use the converter because it's a f/2.5 lens. For me, it was dead easy. I already had the Nikon WA converter, so I just had to add the 46mm adapter ring to it. If you search the forum here for alternative converters, you'll see that you can fashion other WA converter to work with the 14 f/2.5 and get 11mm. It's cheaper plus mine has a 77mm filter ring for polarizer or Grad ND which the GWC-1 can not accommodate. That was the deal breaker for me. Hope this helps.

 

No worries ... out of interest is there a 9-18 43rds zoom FE?

 

Only fisheye primes AFAIK. For a list of lenses see http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

 

What difference would that make? Both have the same sensor (micro 43), they are not really different cameras such as EOS vs Panasonic would be. if anything my tests on a GH1 will reveal more about the image quality at the edges because the GH1 has a slightly wider sensor area than the Olympus cameras

http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2011/03/gh1-formats-and-raw-pixels.html

But when I have tested legacy lenses between the GH1 and the OM-D I have found the only difference to be the in camera processing

http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2014/05/generations-gh1-vs-e-m5.html

I present the data for lens tests using draw to convert the image without the in camera processing. One such reason for that is that the camera can not know that the GWC is attached to the 14mm, and so it can not use its lens correction database for that. As such even IFF the Oly camera had a different algorithm for producing corrected JPG images for the Pana 14mm it could NOT have that for the combo of the 14mm and GWC.

PTLens does however do corrections for the combo as it was me who submitted the test images to the developer.

My findings of the various posts comparing the various add on wide adapters for the 14mm shows that the Panasonic purpose built one does a better job ... hardly surprising when you think about it.

I'm also about to do a post on putting a 58mm polariser filter onto the GWC adapter as while it isn't threaded it will fit  

PS: as bikerhiker identified if you *already have* a Nikon or other adapter floating around you can put it onto your existing 14mm and get 80% of the benefits of a GWC with no cost. But if you are going to buy something you will have to fart around with adapting it and to save yourself what? $50 over the GWC?

 

also, don't just take my word for it, this guy
http://www.drawnwithlight.com/information

seems to have one that he is also willing to use:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52814785

 

Hi

as I mentioned above:

I've not heard of anyone saying the Panasonic 14mm performs observably differently on Panasonic bodies VS Olympus bodies ... have you? Also having just discounted the possibility of in camera corrections I think it'll be equal on both bodies..

except there is no in camera processing for the adapter available on any body... the camera just doesn't know its there ... there is no electronic connection between the lens and the adapter lens, so if you were worried about squeezing out every last bit of CA and fixing the optical distortions as I said, try PT lens ... but either way its going to be streets ahead of the BodyCap lens for all the originally stated reasons.

ultimately its your choice ...

 

I just used the GWC1 on an extended trip with the 14 Pany, every image I've submitted to microstock agencies have been accepted. With its recent price drop, if you own a 14mm it gives you a 21 & 28mm f2.5 lens which is very useful in travel IMHO. I actually just leave it on my 14mm now.

 

Hi

ahh, I understand ... well its nothing sophisticated, the lens CPU reports to the camera what it is (and that is then also recorded in the EXIF data). It's a simple bit of data that is transferred ... nothing heuristic or evaluative.

glad to help  

anyway, don't loose sight of your initial criteria:

that was what I addressed in first answering your initial post.

Best Wishes