Reading mode: Light Dark

New tele lenses comparison page is online

Go to last post
C

Ching-Kuang Shene

New member
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Hi FZ-10 Users,

I just added a long over-due telephoto lenses comparison page to my FZ-10 user guide. Lenses compared include Canon TL-55, 1.5X, Minolta ACT-100 1.5X, Olympus TCON-14B, Olympus TCON-17 and Sony VCL HGD1758. Comments and suggestions are most welcome.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500/5700 and Panasonic FZ-10 User Guides
 
Looks great! Some suggestions for improvement:

o add more photos taken with actual lenses at various zoom ranges

o include the Raynox DCR-2020PRO (2.2x) and Raynox DCR-1540PRO (1.54x) lenses.
 
Sundews said:
o add more photos taken with actual lenses at various zoom ranges
Click to expand...
See the "Lens Overview" section.
Sundews said:
o include the Raynox DCR-2020PRO (2.2x) and Raynox DCR-1540PRO
(1.54x) lenses.
Click to expand...
As posted elsewhere, I am not interested in getting the 2.2X. I used the 1540 with a Nikon 5700 and was not impressed. So, I only test and/or compare those lenses that I have good experience and am impressed. Sorry for not being able to do the Raynox. Gil, a frequent contributer of this forum, and others did some good work in comparing the 2.2X. Search this forum and you should be to find their posts.

CK
 
Member said:
Member said:
o add more photos taken with actual lenses at various zoom ranges
Click to expand...
See the "Lens Overview" section.
Click to expand...
What I meant was photos from all of the lenses at various zoom ranges, for comparisons of each lens on quality and vignetting. The "Lens Overivew" section did not show this.
Member said:
Member said:
o include the Raynox DCR-2020PRO (2.2x) and Raynox DCR-1540PRO
(1.54x) lenses.
Click to expand...
As posted elsewhere, I am not interested in getting the 2.2X. I
used the 1540 with a Nikon 5700 and was not impressed. So, I only
test and/or compare those lenses that I have good experience and am
impressed. Sorry for not being able to do the Raynox. Gil, a
frequent contributer of this forum, and others did some good work
in comparing the 2.2X. Search this forum and you should be to
find their posts.
Click to expand...
Well, the suggestions were to help improve your site. If you don't want to make your website better, then that is your choice.
 
Why should he go out and purchase lenses he has no interest in using? He developed this (very informative) website for no other reason than to help others who want to see performance of these lenses and have NOT yet purchased them. I don't think he has any obligation to publish any website or findings at all! How about saying "thank you" instead of complaining about it? You could always go out yourself and buy this lens and THEN publish your own website with its performance.......no one is stopping you. Sheesh!! K.
Sundews said:
Well, the suggestions were to help improve your site. If you don't
want to make your website better, then that is your choice.
Click to expand...
--
Galleries: http://www.koo22photos.com/-/koo22photos/default.asp
 
Sundews said:
What I meant was photos from all of the lenses at various zoom
ranges, for comparisons of each lens on quality and vignetting.
The "Lens Overivew" section did not show this.
Click to expand...
Well, this is not a very meaningful comparison and/or test. If a lens performs good when the on-camera lens is at 12X 420mm, that converter lens will still be good when the on-camera lens is at 11X, 10X, etc, and, as a result, one does not have to compare lower zoom ratio. Moreover, when the on-camera is zoomed out to barely avoid vignetting, the on-camera lens will "see" too much of the image projected by a converter lens (e.g., borders not to be picked up in the original design), the image quality would be much worse. If we test this portion, it is not fair to that converter lens. More importantly, most people usually use the 12X setting, which is what I did on my page.
Sundews said:
Well, the suggestions were to help improve your site. If you don't
want to make your website better, then that is your choice.
Click to expand...
We have to learn living within some constraints. So, adding too many lenses to my page, in fact, may not make my site better. If you have the lenses, why don't you do it and beat me?

CK
 
koo22 said:
Why should he go out and purchase lenses he has no interest in
using? He developed this (very informative) website for no other
reason than to help others who want to see performance of these
lenses and have NOT yet purchased them. I don't think he has any
obligation to publish any website or findings at all! How about
saying "thank you" instead of complaining about it? You could
always go out yourself and buy this lens and THEN publish your own
website with its performance.......no one is stopping you.
Sheesh!! K.
Click to expand...
Ching-Kwang said:
Comments and suggestions are most welcome.
Click to expand...
Ching-Kwang specifically asked for comments and suggestions, and I've provided some suggestions on how to improve the website. I didn't realize some people would view that as a crime!
 
Member said:
We have to learn living within some constraints. So, adding too
many lenses to my page, in fact, may not make my site better. If
you have the lenses, why don't you do it and beat me?
Click to expand...
I don't have the Raynox lenses. The best websites I've seen do include actual photos comparison at various zooms - I've find them extremely useful to check for quality, sharpness and vignetting. The B300 website is a good example of that, but they don't include all the lenses, but they do have some of the Raynox lenses. I haven't found a single website that has included all of the teleconverter lens, but your website comes very close to that if it included the Raynox lenses and had the comparison photos.

Again, this is just suggestions for improving your website.
 
Well done - a lot of useful info there - helpful for those looking at a converter.

I'd ignore the snide comments you will have seen - some people want everything laid on a plate for them, so that they don't have to embark on their own research or spend some money.......

One of the unfortunate perils of the Internet is that you come across more of such people than you would normally encounter.
Thanks for the insight on these lenses.
Ching-Kuang Shene said:
Hi FZ-10 Users,

I just added a long over-due telephoto lenses comparison page to my
FZ-10 user guide. Lenses compared include Canon TL-55, 1.5X,
Minolta ACT-100 1.5X, Olympus TCON-14B, Olympus TCON-17 and Sony
VCL HGD1758. Comments and suggestions are most welcome.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500/5700 and Panasonic FZ-10 User
Guides
Click to expand...
 
Nice comparisons, thanks for the effort, it is very helpful
Ching-Kuang Shene said:
Hi FZ-10 Users,

I just added a long over-due telephoto lenses comparison page to my
FZ-10 user guide. Lenses compared include Canon TL-55, 1.5X,
Minolta ACT-100 1.5X, Olympus TCON-14B, Olympus TCON-17 and Sony
VCL HGD1758. Comments and suggestions are most welcome.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500/5700 and Panasonic FZ-10 User
Guides
Click to expand...
 
Is anyone familar with the Phonex:
Professional 2x Telephoto Lens (RETAIL PRICE - $299.95)
2x Professional Telephoto Lens
High Definition Lens
Lens Construction 3 Elements with 3 Groups
Rear Thread 62mm
Front Filter Thread 72mm

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30068&item=3832774498&rd=1&ssPageName=WD2V
Ching-Kuang Shene said:
Hi FZ-10 Users,

I just added a long over-due telephoto lenses comparison page to my
FZ-10 user guide. Lenses compared include Canon TL-55, 1.5X,
Minolta ACT-100 1.5X, Olympus TCON-14B, Olympus TCON-17 and Sony
VCL HGD1758. Comments and suggestions are most welcome.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500/5700 and Panasonic FZ-10 User
Guides
Click to expand...
--
'Ah, friends, this pleasant world is a sad one, too, isn't it? Let us help one
another, let us help one another.' George Eliot.
 
aisallen said:
Is anyone familar with the Phonex:
Professional 2x Telephoto Lens (RETAIL PRICE - $299.95)

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30068&item=3832774498&rd=1&ssPageName=WD2V
Click to expand...
If the compared/tested lenses are out of your budget constraints or you need more than 1.7X, go with a Raynox. Raynox lenses are good mid-level lenses and, in many causes, cheaper than the compared/tested ones. However, don't expect to have spectacular results. If Raynox is still too much for you, then try this Phoenix or something like Optika, Crystal Optics. If is very likely that you may feel sorry about your investment. The most safe and cheap option, IMO, is the Canon TL-55 1.4X. Yes, it is ONLY 1.4X; but, this TL-55 performs respectively. I would like to have good (or at least acceptable) image quality first, followed by lens power. Of course, different people have very different meaning of "acceptable". It is all your call.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam
Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500/5700 and Panasonic FZ-10 User Guides
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top