WCON-P01 (e-pl5)

I was looking to go a bit wider, without dropping big $$ on a 9-18mm lens right now.  So, for $60 (used), I picked up the WCON-P01 wide angle converter.  Just received it today and was able to test it out on a rainy walk outdoors.

So far, I'm not in love with it, but it's not too bad and I see some potential.  I wanted to share a few shots from today, as well as what the converter looks like on my EPL5.  I didn't use a tripod and the ISO is pretty high on a couple of these, but no noise reduction was applied.  I cropped to 3:2, because that's what I prefer for most of my photos.

I would love to see YOUR photos taken with the WCON and hear your thoughts on it's performance.

I'm going to give this a bump to ask again if anybody has any photos taken with the WCON-P01 they would like to post.  I am interested in seeing what folks are doing with this converter.

Hi!

I'm not using the converter myself, but I know it has been designed to work on wide angle lenses, and as such, should not be used on the kit lens zoomed in. I see some of your pictures have been taken away from 14mm.

I really like #3 and I'd say that you're off to a great start with the WCON-P01, I recently picked up the MCON-P01 and have been very happy with it as a macro substitute until I can afford the new 60mm macro. If I can find a WCON for the same price you paid I'd pick one up to avoid having to shell out for the 9-18/7-14 for now.

Hey Robbie

For starters -- stick to using it with your 14-42 set to 14. That's that it is designed for. At that setting you get a f3.5 11mm. That's a pretty darned good aperture/focal length combination with surprisingly good IQ obtained at very low cost.

I bought it, used it, was pleased with the results, then abandoned it for two reasons -- I fell into the habit of using the Panny 14 as my default walk around lens rather than the 14-42 zoom, and the WCON wouldn’t fit on that lens, of course, and because I had to get the 9-18 because I needed the somewhat wider 9mm for professional work.

I found it suffered barrel distortion but it was a simple curve so easily corrected in PP if desired (most of the time it didn’t matter).

It was great for convenience -- light and small, fitting into any pocket, and giving that extra width with good aperture that could make a real difference to a shot.

In fact, I m now considering buying the Panny equivalent that fits on the 14.

There have been some good threads on this forum from time to time showing WCON work.

Sorry -- I can’t post examples of my work with this lens right now -- DPR is having a problem accessing my Gallery and the originals are on a different computer. I’ll try later.

Cheers, geoff

Robbie have a look at my gallery -- top of page 20, middle of page 24, top of page 27.

On page 20, you will seethe barrel distortion illustrated, and how easily it is fixed (if it needs doing) in PP.

On page 24 (I think) you will see flare with the WCON and flare controlled -- same shot with my left hand shading the front element.

I had a lot of fun with this inexpensive lens.

Cheers, geoff

Hen3ry wrote:

Hey Robbie

For starters -- stick to using it with your 14-42 set to 14. That's that it is designed for. At that setting you get a f3.5 11mm. That's a pretty darned good aperture/focal length combination with surprisingly good IQ obtained at very low cost.

I bought it, used it, was pleased with the results, then abandoned it for two reasons -- I fell into the habit of using the Panny 14 as my default walk around lens rather than the 14-42 zoom, and the WCON wouldn’t fit on that lens, of course, and because I had to get the 9-18 because I needed the somewhat wider 9mm for professional work.

I found it suffered barrel distortion but it was a simple curve so easily corrected in PP if desired (most of the time it didn’t matter).

It was great for convenience -- light and small, fitting into any pocket, and giving that extra width with good aperture that could make a real difference to a shot.

In fact, I m now considering buying the Panny equivalent that fits on the 14.

There have been some good threads on this forum from time to time showing WCON work.

Sorry -- I can’t post examples of my work with this lens right now -- DPR is having a problem accessing my Gallery and the originals are on a different computer. I’ll try later.

Cheers, geoff

Before buying an entirely new lens - which would need to be a 3rd party optic in any case, you might wish to try the WCON with a 46-37mm step-down ring.  Although, I wouldn't be surprised if it vignettes terribly - but these step-down rings only cost $5 or so on ebay, so it's worth trying it.

RobbieV wrote:

I'm going to give this a bump to ask again if anybody has any photos taken with the WCON-P01 they would like to post.  I am interested in seeing what folks are doing with this converter.

You could also search instead of waiting for responses. Plenty of material can be found with this simple search:
https://www.google.com/search?q=wcon-p01+site%3Aforums.dpreview.com

The converter is OK. It was one of the reasons why I chose Olympus vs Panasonic when I bought m4/3 camera in 2011. I switched from Ricoh compact camera with zoom starting from 24mm. I had to have 24mm or wider but didn't want to pay $500+ for native UWA. Olympus had this converter in 2011, that was the reason #4 or 5 in order of importance to choose Olympus with kit zoom.

It doesn't significantly degrade kit zoom IQ which stays pretty good, corners may suffer, but just a little. I was happy with it and I took some photos that wouldn't be possible with 28mm equivalent lens. I wrote about it in 2011 and I have some photos in my gallery.

1

Horseshoe bend in Arizona requires lens a bit wider than 24mm equivalent.

2

3

But then there is a distortion

4

At that time I was clueless, I didn't correct distortion and I sometimes shot kit zoom wide open with converter. Stopping down to F5.6 would have made corners better. Barrel distortion can be fixed (it would become rather 11.5-12mm lens then). And, as opposed to newer Panasonic WA converter WCON-P01 can be used at longer focal lengths if you don't have time to unmount it.

In the end, in half a year I bought Olympus 9-18mm and sold converter. The reason was - 9-18mm (although not stellar lens) still has better sharpness across the frame at 11-12mm even if you stop down kit zoom with converter. Converter gives more aberrations and it's more prone to flare (no hood possible). 9-18 is more compact than kit + converter, it doesn't have that distortion and 9mm is much wider than 11mm.

But I can understand someone choosing WCON-P01 converter - if one makes LR profile to correct barrel distortion, careful about flare and CA, uses it at stopped down, this can be a decent UWA lens.

Thank you for your responses and feedback, everybody. I have had a chance to shoot the converter a little more and I do think it's pretty good for the money.  As some of you pointed out, some of my examples were shot zoomed in a little, which the converter is not made for.  I guess I can be lazy sometimes and not want to bother with taking the converter on and off.  I have a trip to Maui coming up in a couple weeks and I think I'll rent a 9-18mm for the week and if I really love it, try to come up with the $$.