ClubSNAP Photography Forums

Go Back   ClubSNAP Photography Forums > Equipment Discussions > Others

Others All other makes/brands/DIY & misc photographic gadgets discussed here.


 
Thread Tools
Old 21st October 2002   #1
PsychoBoy
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 332
Default focus optics, any good?

has anyone try any lens from focus optics? I am more interested in their teleconverters. wonder if they are any good. anyone? or any website that has more info?

Thank you.
PsychoBoy is offline  
Old 22nd October 2002   #2
PsychoBoy
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 332
Default

no one heard of it? I saw them here
PsychoBoy is offline  
Old 22nd October 2002   #3
nEkOgOtCh
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Meowyland :)
Posts: 651
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by PsychoBoy
no one heard of it? I saw them here
Wah piang oi! This is one of my first and major regret in getting this lens Focus Optics 58mm 0.5X.

Caused so much of a vignetting that really distorts the picture. This was used together with another lens 28-90 and at 28mm the vignetting is really bad :l And blurry too.

To make things worse, it seem to cut my light by 1/2 to 1 stop. Not sure why but it did :l

Oh yes, it causes your shots to look grainy too. Once again not sure why though. If you want and can use, I can loan it to you to try it out ;P
nEkOgOtCh is offline  
Sponsored Link
Old 22nd October 2002   #4
PsychoBoy
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 332
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by nEkOgOtCh


Wah piang oi! This is one of my first and major regret in getting this lens Focus Optics 58mm 0.5X.

Caused so much of a vignetting that really distorts the picture. This was used together with another lens 28-90 and at 28mm the vignetting is really bad :l And blurry too.

To make things worse, it seem to cut my light by 1/2 to 1 stop. Not sure why but it did :l

Oh yes, it causes your shots to look grainy too. Once again not sure why though. If you want and can use, I can loan it to you to try it out ;P
0.5x is wide angle right? wah! really that bad huh? the sample picture shown there still look quite ok somemore.. the price looks cheap on the web page but useless if the quality is bad...
PsychoBoy is offline  
Old 22nd October 2002   #5
mpenza
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
Default

from the samples, you could see that the lenses are not properly speced. The pics taken with 2.0x tele and 0.5x wide didn't vary as much as what real 2x and 0.5x should.

Last edited by mpenza; 22nd October 2002 at 10:46 AM.
mpenza is offline  
Old 22nd October 2002   #6
Zerstorer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,610
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by PsychoBoy


0.5x is wide angle right? wah! really that bad huh? the sample picture shown there still look quite ok somemore.. the price looks cheap on the web page but useless if the quality is bad...
Look closely again, the 2X tele shot exhibits CA as well as corner softening. With a clearer/larger picture it may be more obvious.
Zerstorer is offline  
Old 22nd October 2002   #7
nEkOgOtCh
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Meowyland :)
Posts: 651
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Zerstorer


Look closely again, the 2X tele shot exhibits CA as well as corner softening. With a clearer/larger picture it may be more obvious.
Likewise, the 0.5X wide angle does the same thing together with vignetting

Perhaps the next SEED u can come down and remind me so that I can show you the pix I took :|

If you observe their samples, they actually show signs of under exposure as compared to the original pix
nEkOgOtCh is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 05:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2009 ClubSNAP.com
Page generated in 0.07012 seconds with 7 queries