Which shot which? Spot the indefinables! — Three at 300mm

[Rambling Sam]

I suppose it goes to show that when you use a converter, the results are better than many people (who probably haven't used one) think they would be?

 

[alex g]

I suppose it goes to show that when you use a converter, the results are better than many people (who probably haven't used one) think they would be?

I believe that in comparision to most other systems, the Oly Four Thirds teleconverters are unusually effective. I'm guessing that it may be a function of the near-telecentricity of the lenses — if light is emerging from the back of the lens in parallel rays, it seems not unreasonable to expect it to be more amenable to cropping and magnifying than if it were a diverging cone. Also, unlike the MC-14, the EC-14 and EC-20 are optically corrected for distortion, so there remains no software distortion correction in the 4/3 pipeline. Although distortion in the µ43 300/4 is 100% optically corrected, adding the MC-14 to it unfortunately does add a layer of software correction.

So I think I'd qualify your observation by suggesting that when you use an Olympus Four Thirds teleconverter with one of the better lenses in that series, the results are likely to be better than many people think they would be.