Wide angle converter?

Isola Verde wrote:

Keith, if you're serious, I'll happily sell you my almost unused GWC1 for 149 Euro.

Bought via Amazon in December 2014, and I doubt it's been out of the house again since!

This one...
https://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/camera-accessories/lenses-and-filters/dmw-gwc1gu.html
.......................

Peter

Peter, thanks for this offer. I am thinking about it..!

Right now I'm leaning toward the Fujifilm converter because it is so much cheaper. But if the Panasonic product synced the new focal length to metadata, that would entice me... I'd also love the tele converter, and the whole set. Do you have those others? Do you know about the metadata?

Keithpictures wrote:

Isola Verde wrote:

Keith, if you're serious, I'll happily sell you my almost unused GWC1 for 149 Euro.

Bought via Amazon in December 2014, and I doubt it's been out of the house again since!

This one...
https://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/camera-accessories/lenses-and-filters/dmw-gwc1gu.html
.......................

Peter

Peter, thanks for this offer. I am thinking about it..!

Right now I'm leaning toward the Fujifilm converter because it is so much cheaper. But if the Panasonic product synced the new focal length to metadata, that would entice me... I'd also love the tele converter, and the whole set. Do you have those others? Do you know about the metadata?

The Fuji was formulated to suit lenses projecting onto a sensor of perhaps a quarter the size of M43... look for 1/1.7" or 1/1.8" on the charts and tables here...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format

But do please post some results if you decide to take that option! Who knows, maybe Fuji's tech people did massively over-engineer their converter?

Of my four Panasonic M43 cameras (GX1, G3, GF7 and GX80), none has the facility to alter EXIF data to reflect the presence of a front-of-lens converter... and I don't recollect reading of any interchangeable-lens camera that did.

Best way to spot pictures taken with almost any such accessory is to check their corners!

Peter

EDIT to add...

Should have asked by now, but are we mainly talking about pictures to be uploaded at around 1024 pixels square to Instagram etc - whose absolute quality isn't a very high priority, and whose EXIF etc you won't be able to adjust before doing that?

Isola Verde wrote:

Should have asked by now, but are we mainly talking about pictures to be uploaded at around 1024 pixels square to Instagram etc - whose absolute quality isn't a very high priority, and whose EXIF etc you won't be able to adjust before doing that?

I am an exhibiting artist, so I would like to print up to A0 (1 meter long or so), as well as online publishing. I shoot a lot of architecture, which is why I want a wide angle. I used the PL 8-18mm for some of the images below, but it's too expensive for me to own.

I value sorting through various EXIF data in Bridge when doing my edits, so it would be nice to have the info. A trade-off, because I also really value walking around with my "rangefinder" as compact as possible.

Example of current work on view in Berlin

Here is an album of shots I've taken on my Olympus E-P5 with my Olympus E-P5, Lumix 14/2.5, and Fujifilm WL-FXE01 0.76x conversion lens between f/6.3 and f/8, using no flash. All images have been processed from RAW and sharpened but not corrected for distortion. Some shots were corrected for vignetting, but at these tiny apertures there was much been yelling.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/KGuC6WvEkjfW19pZ8

"there was much been yelling." Make that "there wasn't much vignetting." When will I learn not to trust Microsoft Cortana when transcribing voice to text?