Raynox 2020 add-on 2.2X teleconverter on Canon 100/2

[Ultrapix]

In this discussion http://forum.mflenses.com/with-2-teleconverters-would-an-f5-6-lens-be-f16-t83972.html in addition to other topics, there has been discussion of tele-optical add-ons, which differ from the more common teleconverters in that they are applied in front of the lens, and not between it and the camera. On this occasion, having myself a Raynox 2020 2.2x, I realized that there is very little information on the web about the results that can be legitimately expected from these add-ons, which compared to common teleconverters have the advantage of not causing a loss of brightness, except that due to the absorption of the glass. One may register, as in the examples published below, vignetting, more evident as much larger the diameter of the starting lens is. Other disadvantages include a noticeable lengthening of the minimum focusing distance, and, at least in my case, an annoying longitudinal chromatic aberration, which the software cannot completely remove, and may disturb in certain images. The following examples were taken with a Canon EOS-R + Canon EF 100/2, always wide open; resulting focal length is 220 mm f:2; only the last image of the tower was taken at f:8, which made the vignetting more visible. No sharpening, just resized and adjusted brightness and contrast, very slight interventions, because the images come out already very vivid.

Finally, the depth of field is undoubtedly that typical of the resulting focal length/native speed, which is not the case with common teleconverters, obviously because of the lowering of relative brightness (two stops in the case of a 2X)

#1



#2


#3


#4


#5


#6


#7


#8


#9


#10


#11


#12


#13


#14

[caspert79]

Pretty disturbing vignetting. It also seems to do weird things to the field of focus, most evident in image #3. I would just crop the images taken without a TC; plenty of detail would be retained with that excellent EF 100/2.

[RokkorDoctor]

Clearly the exit pupil of the TC is unsuitable for lenses with an entrance pupil like the Canon EF 100/2. Way too much vignetting and poor bokeh.

I would agree with caspert79 that cropping would be your better option here.

[Ultrapix]

[Ultrapix]

[eggplant]

Honestly at longer distance targets it looks pretty alright- see shot #9, #11 and #13. Even shot #10 looks okay.

The vignetting has certainly changed the look of the lens but it hasn't destroyed it. I could however be looking at a selective sample. I would also like to see firm comparisons between cropping aswell.

I'm not sure on the recommendations to crop. Half of these shots are about depth of field!

Did you correct for vignetting before uploading these?

I would still adjust expectations wisely based on the size of the rear element. It's certainly not 50mm across:

[alex ph]

Great object / background separation and airy volume the lens gives to the whole picture.

In some shots it looks like a long version of Fujian 35mm. And to put it clear, I consider this to be a merit.

[Ultrapix]

[Ultrapix]