Raynox 2020 2.2x tc lens test report.

Hatstand wrote:

Hen3ry wrote:

The "low quality Raynox". Well, I'll see. The Raynox c/u lenses are excellent quality.

Well, it's relative - the Nikon TC-E17ED is optically superior to every other afocal telconverter I've ever tried... whereas my Raynox 2020 compares very poorly to my other TC's despite having the longest reach of them all...

There may be sample variance, Adrian speaks very highly of his copy and if I understand correctly it is very old... but my copy performs very poorly, and is a lot more recent. The Raynox is also very light for such a TC, which generally doesn't bode well for optical quality...

I just looked it up.That Nikon goes on the rear of the lens, I think. And advantage of the Raynox is that it goes on the front and you don't lose any aperture.

No, the Nikon TC-E17ED is definitely an afocal (end-of-lens) teleconverter...! I've used it a lot, so I ought to know! ;-D

Nikon TC-E17ED

Hi Hatstand, ... I am blown away by the quality of your airshow photos, you sure have a seriously good quality setup that my Raynox (nor my my shooting skill) can match.

I have been trying to source the afocal Nikon TC you use, but they appear to be like rocking horse manure (very hard to get hold of) and extremely expensive.

I did state in my article that my Raynox TC does indeed have many faults, but with the right subject and conditions it is of benefit - after processing. You flight images look razor and with no colour artifacts. But gosh that Nikon TC looks a seriously heavy bit of kit?

PS. Have you tried it on your 100-400 yet?