Raynox DCR-720 - test (Fuji s5000/5500 and other)

[mike1964]

In this topik you will find a test of Raynox DCR-720; a great lens for s5000/5500

italian version:

http://www.photo4u.it/viewtopic.php?t=39648&highlight=raynox

tank you to Morphosis and Link for english translation!

[Link]

Raynox dcr-720 review - beta version (v2) - test done by mike1964

I have tested this lens on s5000 and on s5500 (they have the same lens group), threfore I don't know how it works on other digicams, but I suppose that they give the same results.

The dcr-720 is an add-on lens that you can fit on cameras with fixed lens (you don't change the lens). Its diameter is 52mm, therefore, if you want to use it with s5xxx, you have to buy its tube adapter too, or take a step down ring from 55 to 52mm.

The most attractive part of an add-on lens is that it don't slows down the original lens, which remains the same; in my test, the relation between aperture and diafram isn't changed, therefore the Raynox don't "steal" light.

Last premised: many times, you buy this add-on lens for an architecture's interior use, for a party with many people...; allright, just do it, but you have to remember that you can't use the flash of your cams; the big dimensions of Raynox add-ons, in fact, cover its light so you must use an external flash.

Do you want to know how good is the Raynox dcr-720? Fine, in my opinion, it's very good; more than I espected. The Raynox dcr-720 don't decrease image quality, and this is the greater results for me (you won't think that an add-on lens can INCREASE the quality of your fixed lens, do you?)

Below there are some shots (with and without the Raynox add-on); I want clarify that all the images of this test are only resized for fit in the forum, and after I applied a bit of USM to recover sharpness lost in the process.










Results seems very good; the field angle is effectively wider, and there isn't loss in quality of the image, expecially about chromatic aberration and flare; there is, instead, an apparent barrel distorsion, but you can recover it, if you want, like I'll show in the next example (not corrected, and corrected):




- Tower shot, not corrected: There is visible vignetting because between the Raynox and the Fuji tube adapter I have fit a polarizer filter: except
vignetting, there aren't any problem with image quality.
- Tower shot, corrected: I have corrected the barrel distorsion with the software "Photobrush" (http://www.mediachance.com/pbrush/index.html) -
but many other softwares can do it. Black vignetting is disappeared after this correction without another hardwork. Therefore it's not a real problem.

Some of you may think about these examples to be too "easy" for a test; In fact, they lack huge contrasty situations, so possible issues could show up much hardly. Well, given that I surely want to do more difficult tests with the Raynox, I want to point out that the polarizer filter, used for the tower shot, was there for a reason: it has reduced sky contrast, making it darker; as already said, pressing the shutter button won't be enough to take a proper photo, a bit of technique is necessary , but I'll cover this at the end of the post.







Here's a couple of examples taken in more difficult situations; there's a strong contrast all over the scene, with bright sky and many dark details: an ideal test to show up flares and aberrations. Even in this hard situation, I don't think that the Raynox did bad, in fact the result compared with that of the original lens is pratically the same.

The hardest of all shots, hovewer, is this:




A shot like that can make you think not to buy any optical converter; flares and chromatic aberrations are clearly visible, despite the small size. But remember that this photo was shot in critical light conditions (a july's morning with very strong and clear light contrasts), and with camera purposely pushed to its limits: F2.8 (the maximum possible aperture) to show up all issues.

What can I say? Beyond the optical converter, that once more doesn't worse the original lens performance, this is a fairly typical example of a shot NOT to do (well, not in this way). I doubt that even more expensive cameras with much better optics will achieve any better results; a polarizer filter could have darken the part of the sky (but not all, given the light direction) and a more closed shutter could have limited some of the aberrations; but reality is that in situations like this there're only two solutions: wait for better light conditions within the day, or hope to get something you can be satisfied with.

Concluding, some advices (which may apply to no-converter situations too, but they're much more useful when using it):

-1) Be careful for direct light to the front of the lens, many times a photo comes up bad because of not using a lens hood; if you haven't one, try to shoot from a place with shadows to cover the lens, or to use a card to cast a shadow over it; it's even possible to use the hand... (in this case make sure to select a fast shutter speed because you're shooting with only one hand now )

-2) If the scene is too contrasty because of the sky, darken it with a polarizer filter or, if not possible, use an intermediate aperture setting; the best solution hovewer, if possible, is to wait for better light conditions (or hope to be satisfied with the result).

-3) Probably, if you mounted a wide converter you don't need to use the telephoto end of the lens; hovewer, if it happens and you notice that the camera struggle to find a focus point, turn on macro mode and all will work well (with the s5000/s5500 tested, I don't know with other cameras).

-4) Be sure to have the conveter well cleaned, in both front and back; a suggestion that may sound stupid I know...

[morphosis]

bel lavoro link
ci meritiamo un applauso

[Link]

hehe è venuto bene!

morphosis

[mike1964]

Tanks boys!

[morphosis]

ma io pensavo che la seconda parte (il secondo post) fosse altrettanto lungo, invece è solo un rigo, sigh.
Bhè possiamo dire allora che è completo. Come ha già detto link, se qualcuno leggendo trovasse degli errori o delle espressioni non corrette ce lo fà sapere?!

Bravi a tutti: mike per il test e link per l'ottimo inglese, davvero notevole.

[Link]

Grazie, ottimo anche il tuo pezzo!

Ah volevo dirti che mi sono permesso di correggere qualche lettera mancante o delle minuscole dopo un punto e qualche parola che mi sembrava più appropriata.

L'ultima cosa che farei è metterlo in evidenza o mettere in evidenza un topic con i link agli articoli in inglese che tradurremo, perchè ho idea che ce ne saranno altri...

Toglierei anche gli interventi non necessari lasciando soltanto la guida (anche perchè i commenti sono tutti in italiano...anche questo quindi

[morphosis]

si avevo visto, ma hai fatto benissimo, la stavo rileggendo per correggere delle cose, ma poi andava bene così ed ho capito.