FZ20 teleconverter

[marty]

Does anyone have any good options instead of Pana's own expensive teleconverter ? I take many pictures of windsurfers and need to get close :)

[pwiles1968]

I am told the Olympus stuff will work with the appropriate adapter.

Link (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2076)

[genece]

Here is a bunch of stuff on FZ camera accessories
Shenes site (http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/)

Shene has done a lot of work on this subject, I would just like to add that the Phayee adapter is a fine adapter and the Raynox 2020 pro is a good teleconverter.
I am not trying to make your decision just add those items to your options

[Jim Last]

Looking at the numerous threads on tele lenses the Oly TCON-14B and the Canon TL-55 seem to get the thumbs up. The TCON-14B will fit to a 62mm adaptor, such as the Pameraal PA62 or PD62 or the Phayee.

[marty]

Thanks everyone

[Boomhauer]

Genece wrote:

I would just like to add that the Phayee adapter is a fine adapter and the Raynox 2020 pro is a good teleconverter.

To Genece and others...
Do you like the Phayee better than Raynox's 5264P and why?

For Genece...
How would you rank center sharpness between the Oly 1.7 and the 2020?

Thanks!

[genece]

It just looks better than the Raynox , they work about the same.

I have no way to measure the sharpness , but I think the Raynox 2020 is quite good. If you have no need for the extra power of the raynox, the Tcon has an advantage in that it does not vignette above 6 Power where the Raynox is close to 12X. So if you have the T con there is a good bit of range you would get with the Tcon that you would have to crop with the Raynox.
I am trying to say with the raynox from 432 to maybe 600 mm you have no coverage. And if you had the Tcon you have coverage all the way from 0 to 750mm.
Here is a picture using the Raynox
http://photos.imageevent.com/grc6/raynox2020pro/websize/Duck1.jpg

I know my explanation is no good but there is a use for both teleconverters

[Boomhauer]

I too am inclined to think that Raynox's stuff is acceptable as your duck shot shows. Based on what I can find out online those who have actually used Raynox's Pro gear are quite satisfied. In particular the 6600 Pro WA and the 250 Macro have elicited very positive comments. But there's no comparison like from the guy that has both the 2020 and a branded competitor like yourself, Genece - thanks!

Guess a guy could pick up the 1540 Pro too if one wanted to cover the missing range you mentioned.

Those Phayee adaptors are getting hard to find is all. If you have time you might comment on filter sizes when the TC is off the camera. My understanding is that it handles 62 rather than the stock 72. If that's the case, my guess is you leave it on all the time, eh?

[Boomhauer]

For Genece again...

Sorry I knew there was something I forgot. As the owner of both the 10 and the 20 would you comment on the noise issue? (there's some scuttlebutt about that the 20 is noisier although from the pics I've seen it's not apparent).

Thanks!

[genece]

Just my honest opinion, but I really do not see a problem with noise with the FZ20 as a matter of fact indoors, in less than great light, the FZ20 has less noise and I set the Noise reduction to low.
You see more noise in the original size picture because the picture is bigger,
But if you view them both at full screen say 1200 X 1000 pixels ( or whatever your monitor is set at ) there is no noise.
There also is no noise in an 8.5 X 11 print which is a large as I can print.

Believe me there is very little difference in the lenses, I have lots of Tcon 17 shots but none of the same subject. I very seldom Take the T con with me any more. The wife inherited the Tcon17.
I am just a zoom freak.

[Boomhauer]

My feeling is that there are very different animals out there all calling themselves an FZ20 but in reality quite different beasts. No, I'm not a looney. This problem surfaced with the FZ10 with some reviewers, both pro and user, differing widely in their assessment. And noise was what they tended to disagree on.

I think this is a QC issue and would encourage anyone who is not happy with his photos to return the cam for a replacement.

Anyone else share this view?

[genece]

I do not want to start a flaming contest but aside from the troll at dpreview there is no one complaining of noise. And old Ove does not even own the camera, if he owns any camera.
All the owners of the FZ cameras seem to be quite happy and are posting some unbelieveable photos.
It can not be beat for the price , it is not a DSLR and I don"t remember anyone saying it is.
As far as quality control there were some focusing problems reported when the FZ20 first came out but once they read the manual all that went away also.
If you can not tell I really like my Fluzi's

[Boomhauer]

I read your posts (both here and on dpreview) with great interest Genece since you and I seem to like the same things. Did you buy your 2020 at B&H? I too consider myself a "zoom freak" and would be interested in any results you have had stacking TC's. One of the nice things about the 2020 IMO is the preservation of the 2.8 even at full tele extension which, as you have previously pointed out, is the only focal length it can be used at without vignetting.

Do you recommend the Sunpak 383?