accessory lenses for colpix 5700

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mutt, Jul 30, 2004.

  1. mutt

    mutt Guest

    does anyone have any opinions on the aftermarket lenses specifically a 1.5x
    and .6x made by tiffen and raynox? are the Nikon lenses worth the extra or
    are the third party ones just as good?
    mutt, Jul 30, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. mutt

    ArtKramr Guest

    >Subject: accessory lenses for colpix 5700
    >From: "mutt"
    >Date: 7/30/2004 7:10 AM Pacific Standard Time
    >Message-id: <UzsOc.26128$>
    >
    >does anyone have any opinions on the aftermarket lenses specifically a 1.5x
    >and .6x made by tiffen and raynox? are the Nikon lenses worth the extra or
    >are the third party ones just as good?



    Third party lenses are NEVER just as good. You pay less, you get less.



    Arthur Kramer
    344th BG 494th BS
    England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
    Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
    http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer
    ArtKramr, Jul 30, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. mutt

    Cooter Guest

    I have and use all three accesory lenses sold by Nikon for the CP5700. I
    find the 1.5x tele to be a very sharp lens. The .8x wide angle is reasonably
    sharp, but it's not hard to see a difference when compared to the prime
    lens. The fisheye leaves a good bit to be desired in terms of sharpness, but
    is still a useful lens for its intended purpose. Be aware it MUST be used
    with macro focusing enabled and the lens option set for the .8 W/A lens.
    This is not made clear by Nikon.

    "mutt" <> wrote in message
    news:UzsOc.26128$...
    > does anyone have any opinions on the aftermarket lenses specifically a

    1.5x
    > and .6x made by tiffen and raynox? are the Nikon lenses worth the extra

    or
    > are the third party ones just as good?
    >
    >
    Cooter, Jul 30, 2004
    #3
  4. (ArtKramr) writes:

    >>Subject: accessory lenses for colpix 5700
    >>From: "mutt"
    >>Date: 7/30/2004 7:10 AM Pacific Standard Time
    >>Message-id: <UzsOc.26128$>
    >>
    >>does anyone have any opinions on the aftermarket lenses specifically a 1.5x
    >>and .6x made by tiffen and raynox? are the Nikon lenses worth the extra or
    >>are the third party ones just as good?

    >
    > Third party lenses are NEVER just as good. You pay less, you get less.


    In the broadest sense, I must simply disagree. For significant
    portions of my photographic experience, the best third-party zoom
    lenses blew most of the models from the body manufacturers completely
    out of the water. I'm thinking of comparing Tokina zooms of the
    middle 1980s to the Nikon and Canon offerings, for example.

    And not *too* long after that the major manufacturers started making
    more inferior lenses. Now you have to sort out the *good* Nikon
    lenses from the mediocre ones before making a choice (and the mediocre
    ones are no longer identified as "E" series; but then, some of the E
    series lenses were actually quite good).

    Then there were the Angenieux zooms, which garnered quite a reputation
    (but Angenieux was slumming by manufacturing 35mm still lenses; they
    mostly do movie stuff that costs immensely more).
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jul 30, 2004
    #4
  5. mutt

    Frank ess Guest

    David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
    > (ArtKramr) writes:
    >
    >>> Subject: accessory lenses for colpix 5700
    >>> From: "mutt"
    >>> Date: 7/30/2004 7:10 AM Pacific Standard Time
    >>> Message-id: <UzsOc.26128$>
    >>>
    >>> does anyone have any opinions on the aftermarket lenses
    >>> specifically a 1.5x and .6x made by tiffen and raynox? are the
    >>> Nikon lenses worth the extra or are the third party ones just as
    >>> good?

    >>
    >> Third party lenses are NEVER just as good. You pay less, you get
    >> less.

    >
    > In the broadest sense, I must simply disagree.


    <snip interesting but off-point exposition and opinion>

    The dozens of responses to this question appearing in the archives of
    this froup seem to me to have been of three kinds:

    "I tried them and tossed them"

    "Good enough for my purposes"

    "The Nikons are best, wouldn't dream of going elsewhere"

    I have one of each of the Nikon ones, and they are good enough for my
    purposes.

    The tele 1.5 is a must-have for my preoccupation: auto racing
    photography.
    http://www.fototime.com/inv/CE0961DAC2DCE8F

    The wide .8 is a waste of money, difficult to make the distinction
    between a "35mm" and a "28mm" shot from this lens. If you are a serious
    wide-angle user, the CP5000 with its .68 (?) takes you out to 19mm with
    good quality.

    The fisheye is fun but not worth it unless you have a specific purpose
    in mind (like having fun with a fisheye that's more than a bit fuzzy at
    the edges).

    Unless there is a pressing need to keep the CP5700 now, save your money
    and invest in next year's innovative products.

    --
    Frank ess
    Frank ess, Jul 30, 2004
    #5
  6. mutt

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 10:10:57 -0400, in rec.photo.digital "mutt"
    <> wrote:

    >does anyone have any opinions on the aftermarket lenses specifically a 1.5x
    >and .6x made by tiffen and raynox? are the Nikon lenses worth the extra or
    >are the third party ones just as good?


    I agree with Frank and Cooter in regard to the TC-15. Just be aware you can
    only use at max zoom. One other point if you are interested in using
    filters with the 5700/8700 and the TC-15, Next Photo makes a 58mm adapter
    for the 5700/8700 which allows you to use 58mm filters which will then also
    fit the TC-15 by itself.

    The WC-80 is sharp, but has a bit of barrel distortion which I correct in
    software. It is large and heavy. It also uses the same adapter as the
    TC-15. Has a brain dead plastic slip over lens cover whos fit absolutely
    sucks. It's hard to get off in the cold and in the summer heat will not
    stay on. It was a royal pain having to hold the lens cover on while
    climbing Diamond Head last week. While I hear Frank's it's not wide enough
    comment, making it bigger and heavier would not be helpful for my uses. Oh,
    almost forgot, no provision for filters.

    The FC-9 has been a major disappointment for me compared to my old 990/FC-8
    combo. It's VERY fuzzy around the edges and can really only be used at full
    wide, producing circular images or you need to be very aware when composing
    zoomed it to leave out the fuzzy outer area from you composition. I did not
    have to do this with the 990/FC8. It is quite large and heavy and requires
    another adapter to mount to the camera. I think the lens/adapter design are
    the problem here as the minimum aperture of the FC-9 is smaller than the
    aperture of the 5700, so anything outside of this smaller projected
    aperture is out of focus.

    I have no experience with 3rd party converters, as I had all three for my
    old 990 and was very happy with all of them.

    ________________________________________________________
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990 and 5700 at
    http://EdwardGRuf.com
    Ed Ruf, Jul 30, 2004
    #6
  7. www.nextphoto.com .

    I bought an adapter ring tthere and now enjoy putting different flters on my
    camera quite ahppily.



    "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    news:-b.net...
    > (ArtKramr) writes:
    >
    > >>Subject: accessory lenses for colpix 5700
    > >>From: "mutt"
    > >>Date: 7/30/2004 7:10 AM Pacific Standard Time
    > >>Message-id: <UzsOc.26128$>
    > >>
    > >>does anyone have any opinions on the aftermarket lenses specifically a

    1.5x
    > >>and .6x made by tiffen and raynox? are the Nikon lenses worth the extra

    or
    > >>are the third party ones just as good?

    > >
    > > Third party lenses are NEVER just as good. You pay less, you get less.

    >
    > In the broadest sense, I must simply disagree. For significant
    > portions of my photographic experience, the best third-party zoom
    > lenses blew most of the models from the body manufacturers completely
    > out of the water. I'm thinking of comparing Tokina zooms of the
    > middle 1980s to the Nikon and Canon offerings, for example.
    >
    > And not *too* long after that the major manufacturers started making
    > more inferior lenses. Now you have to sort out the *good* Nikon
    > lenses from the mediocre ones before making a choice (and the mediocre
    > ones are no longer identified as "E" series; but then, some of the E
    > series lenses were actually quite good).
    >
    > Then there were the Angenieux zooms, which garnered quite a reputation
    > (but Angenieux was slumming by manufacturing 35mm still lenses; they
    > mostly do movie stuff that costs immensely more).
    > --
    > David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    > RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    > Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/>

    <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    > Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    Richard Tomkins, Aug 4, 2004
    #7
  8. Sorry, it's http://www.nextphoto.net/



    "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    news:-b.net...
    > (ArtKramr) writes:
    >
    > >>Subject: accessory lenses for colpix 5700
    > >>From: "mutt"
    > >>Date: 7/30/2004 7:10 AM Pacific Standard Time
    > >>Message-id: <UzsOc.26128$>
    > >>
    > >>does anyone have any opinions on the aftermarket lenses specifically a

    1.5x
    > >>and .6x made by tiffen and raynox? are the Nikon lenses worth the extra

    or
    > >>are the third party ones just as good?

    > >
    > > Third party lenses are NEVER just as good. You pay less, you get less.

    >
    > In the broadest sense, I must simply disagree. For significant
    > portions of my photographic experience, the best third-party zoom
    > lenses blew most of the models from the body manufacturers completely
    > out of the water. I'm thinking of comparing Tokina zooms of the
    > middle 1980s to the Nikon and Canon offerings, for example.
    >
    > And not *too* long after that the major manufacturers started making
    > more inferior lenses. Now you have to sort out the *good* Nikon
    > lenses from the mediocre ones before making a choice (and the mediocre
    > ones are no longer identified as "E" series; but then, some of the E
    > series lenses were actually quite good).
    >
    > Then there were the Angenieux zooms, which garnered quite a reputation
    > (but Angenieux was slumming by manufacturing 35mm still lenses; they
    > mostly do movie stuff that costs immensely more).
    > --
    > David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    > RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    > Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/>

    <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    > Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    Richard Tomkins, Aug 4, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Pete C
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    505
    Pete C
    Apr 28, 2004
  2. Hap Shaughnessy

    Are Kodak accessory lenses very useful?

    Hap Shaughnessy, Sep 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    276
    Hap Shaughnessy
    Sep 8, 2004
  3. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    426
    Miles Treacher
    Sep 21, 2006
  4. JohnR66

    accessory lenses for A610/A620

    JohnR66, Oct 22, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    286
    JohnR66
    Oct 22, 2006
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    670
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page