Raynox 2020 2.2x tc lens test report.

Hatstand wrote:

Adrian Harris wrote:

Hi Hatstand, any chance of some examples. The 1.7x Nikon TC-E17ED is one teleconverter that I have not owned or been able to test. 'Back in the days' when TC's were the only way to get more reach, everyone on the Minolta forums said the best of the bunch was the Olympus 1.4x Tcon 14b. But last year when I tried it on a few M43 lenses it performed badly compared to the Raynox - which I admit has many faults, as stated in my article. But I am going to test 4 different TC's against each other in a few weeks for another report to double check them against each other once more.

Anyway, if you could post some example photos where you have used the Nikon TC-E17ED on an M43 lens, it would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

Some of my airshow photos using 45-175mm with teleconverter are in the links below.

They're PP'd and reduced for forums... but if you poke about in the UKAR forums where they're posted, around the same dates... you'll find plenty of examples from the exact same airshows, by other posters who will mostly have been using big lens DSLR's. There are many variables, but it might give an idea of how my m43 photos stack up against the big guns.

Shuttleworth "Fly Navy" 2016, 45-175mm + Nikon TC-E17ED

Shuttleworth Military Pageant 2016, 45-175mm + Panasonic LT55

RIAT 2016, 45-175mm + Nikon TC-E17ED

I might take a couple of shots of a test chart, with my Raynox 2020 vs my Nikon E17ED, for comparison - but that would need to be done outdoors... and the weather stinks right now, so don't hold your breath...

Thanks I'll take a look tonight.

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?

Hen3ry wrote:

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

I have a Raynox 1850 Pro, which is absolutely awful when used on the Pana 45-175mm. CA is overpowering at the longer focal length, and the picture loses focus and sharpness from 120mm upwards.

Nice shots Adrian. Looks like that raynox could be useful at times. Interesting post!

cheers

Hatstand wrote:

It works very well with the 45-175mm because that lens is fixed-size with an internal zoom mechanism. But even then, I am careful to support the TC when attached, with a finger or two - because I don't think the filter threads were designed for anything that heavy...

I found some interesting bits on-line that are designed to support a lens. I have ordered the bits to try on my 45-175mm with one of my heavy converters attached. If it fits well and does the job, I'll start a thread on it with details of the bits plus supporting pics. So keep your eyes out for that  thread.

Sranang Boi wrote:

Hatstand wrote:

It works very well with the 45-175mm because that lens is fixed-size with an internal zoom mechanism. But even then, I am careful to support the TC when attached, with a finger or two - because I don't think the filter threads were designed for anything that heavy...

I found some interesting bits on-line that are designed to support a lens. I have ordered the bits to try on my 45-175mm with one of my heavy converters attached. If it fits well and does the job, I'll start a thread on it with details of the bits plus supporting pics. So keep your eyes out for that thread.

I shall look forward to it .