Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Add-On Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 28, 2007, 5:29 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,723
Default

I am strongly considering buying the Raynox DCR-2020 to put on my Fuji s6000fd, but before I shell out the nearly $ 200, I wanted to ask if anyone in the forum has any experience with this lens.

Specfic questions: 1) Actual amount of increase in focal length obtained...does the increased ability to shoot at a distance offset the cost of the lens? 2) Degredation of light performance....with the Fuji already at f4.9 at max zoom, what is the actual performance when adding the lens on top of it? 3) Image quality...many of the teleconverters discussed in this forum have problems with vignetting, inability to achieve crisp focus, etc....is this the case with the Raynox lens?

Many of the posts I have read in this forum tend to indicate that the Raynox lens, in exchange for costing about 4X as much as the Tokina, Opteka, etc. budget lenses off eBay, performs at a significantly better level.

Anyone have any experience? Sample photos would be great. Thanks.
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 29, 2007, 8:34 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,723
Default

As is too often the case, I posted the question above without fully exploiting the research resources available on this site. There is a tremendous amount of info available on this general question, although not on the specific comparison about which I asked, available if you search deeply enough. The trick, I'm finding, is how you phrase your search terms and the ability to interpolate results from similar questions to your specific situation.

Of particular interest on this question was a 2005 thread regarding weight--extension questions in regard to the similar Fuji s9000 and the Raynox 2020.
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 29, 2007, 7:14 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

Coach,

I don't have any experience with the Raynox, but I would be interested in hearing what you decide, and seeing some pics taken with it, if you decide to buy.

Regarding the questions you asked, only you can answer the first. I would imagine the Raynox will cost you at least 2 stops throughout your zoom range, so it would preclude your using it for night soccer games. In addition, since it would bring you out to 660mm, a good tripod would definitely be in order. I have heard good things about the Raynox regarding clarity, but I would think that there would have be some vignetting at either extreme of the zoom range. This could probably be cropped out, assuming the clarity reports are accurate.

the Hun


rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 29, 2007, 9:39 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,723
Default

Hun,

The research I've done over the last couple of days has cooled my ardor for the Raynox. There appears to be a real question on what the long-term effects of the length and weight of the Raynox would be on the zoom mechanism of the camera. There are also questions about the quality of the images. I am still looking at a teleconverters, but I will probably be looking at something shorter.

For once, night soccer is not what I'm wanting to shoot, lol. I'm wanting to be able to use the camera to do some long distance daytime shooting, primarily wildlife, in the Ouachita Mountains in which I live. Thus, while I'm concerned about light, it's not as critical as it normally is for me. In addition to a tripod, I suspect that a lens support is going to be needed with any additional weight or length added to the lens tube at full zoom. Definitely, any additional extension is not going to give you a walk-around lens.

I agree that vignetting may be a problem with any teleconverter to some extent, particularly if the lens has to be mated to the camera with adapter rings or tubes. A lens with a native rear thread of 58mm would not have to be coupled.That might help with the vignetting.

There is some really good information on the various teleconverters out there that might be a good match for the s6000fd in the thread titled Olympus T-CON 30s Page Added. shene (shane) has done extensive testing on teleconverters and has authored numerous pages on his tests. Most of his tests have been done with the Panasonic superzooms, but the info is relevant to our cameras.

I'll let you know what Idecide to do, and will post if I buy one.
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 3:38 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 2,093
Default

I generally Ibuy only accessory lenses provided by the camera manufacturer because at least they know the optical interaction between their main lens and the accessory lens. That said many Kodak super-zoom users report good results with the Olympus 1.7x telephotoaccessory lens on their Kodaks.

I do think it's worth noting the Fuji doesn't offer a tele accessory lens, only a wide-angle accessory lens. Is that market analysis or do their optical engineers know something about their lenses that's not obvious to the rest of us?

I have been careful to call these types of lenses accessory lenses. A true tele-converter goes in-between the prime lens and the film/sensor plane. In this case a true 2x tele-converter will cause a two stop loss (f5.6 becomes f11). An accessory lens causes only a transmission loss which depends on the number of elements and the effectiveness of the coatings. Typically a 4 element lens might cause a 1/3-2/3 stop transmission loss regardless of whether it's a 1.4x, 1.7x or 2x.

An appropriately sized tele accessory lens should not cause vignetting at max telephoto. The risk of vignetting will increase as the focal length of the main lens is shortened back toward the normal/wide settings.
ac.smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2007, 4:02 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1
Default

Check out the comparison work from this fellow. I think it seems pretty reasonable although he's using a different camera. http://www.pbase.com/jhphoto/tcons

Also check out these. . . http://www.flickr.com/photos/davesph.../tags/dcr2020/

Different camera again but I think the vignetting from the first guy would be eliminated by zooming all the way in. I believe if you zoom out, all add-on TCON's will have a vignette problem.
exp54672 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2007, 7:31 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,723
Default

rinnie, I decided to go with a Sony VCL-HGD1758. It has 58mm threads on it, so it doesn't have to use any form of adapter. It's a 1.7X. I have also ordered a Bogen-Manfrotto 3420 lens support and will be shooting almost exclusively off a tripod. For any real shooting the weight of the lens means the support will be critical (it's actually a little heavier than the Raynox even though it's shorter)

I got the lens in today and did a few shots supporting with my left hand. Unfortunately, nothing living was visiting my feeder. The two images I'm attaching were shot with identical settings...the first with the lens fully extended, the second with the converter added. No cropping was done and a small amount of identical USM. No adjustments on light, just resized for the forum.


Attached Images
 
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2007, 7:31 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,723
Default

With the lens
Attached Images
 
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2007, 10:47 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
flippedgazelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 930
Default

Coach, the photo you posted indicates intriguing possibilities with this lens... can't wait to see a few more pics.
flippedgazelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2007, 12:07 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Trojansoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 3,723
Default

flipped, after playing with the lens for a few days, I love it, but it HAS to be supported. I'm hand supporting it till I get the lens support in from Adorama, thus there is some problem with camera shake. This is one of the better shots I've gotten (even if a twig got in the line of the shot).

(BTW....check out the Pets forum to find out why I'm not getting good bird pics at my feeder, lol.)
Attached Images
 
Trojansoc is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:05 PM.