• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Fujinon CE20-1 2X teleconverter (Nice) (1 Viewer)

P

Paul Corfield

Well-known member
I picked up a pair of these in one auction on ebay this week for the tiny amount of £1. The teleconverter is quite small, just over 1" total in diameter but it packs a punch in terms of quality. Printed on the side it says X2 Extender CE20-1 For Fujinon Zoom Lens. Mounting it in a macro tube as a normal teleconverter with the lens as close as possible to the camera it gives dead on 3X magnification and good sharpness. See photos.

Paul.
 

Attachments

  • Greenfinch_fujinon2X_web.jpg
    Greenfinch_fujinon2X_web.jpg
    117.9 KB · Views: 273
  • fujinon1.jpg
    fujinon1.jpg
    57 KB · Views: 184
  • fujinon2.jpg
    fujinon2.jpg
    51.1 KB · Views: 188
Looks good Paul, you say you have a pair - would you sell the other one to me, could do with a X3 in my arsenal

Cheers

Vic
 
thornlv said:
Looks good Paul, you say you have a pair - would you sell the other one to me, could do with a X3 in my arsenal

Cheers

Vic
Click to expand...

I'm trying to find out its true value as even though I got a bargain it could have been a good investment. It's a 25mm C mount and these can be used via an adapter on micro 4/3 cameras like the Panasonic G1, GH1, Sony NEX, Olympus PEN etc so that's an area where it might be of value to someone. It's for sale at the right price but at the minute I don't know what it's worth.

Forgot to post camera details on the photo but it was shot at ISO800 1/200 sec.

Paul.
 
thornlv said:
Looks good Paul, you say you have a pair - would you sell the other one to me, could do with a X3 in my arsenal

Cheers

Vic
Click to expand...

Tried with a Macro tube behind my 2.4X TC but couldn't get focus easily due to the amplified movement/pitching and very shallow DOF. Would need a good eyepiece magnifier.
 
alphan said:
Tried with a Macro tube behind my 2.4X TC but couldn't get focus easily due to the amplified movement/pitching and very shallow DOF. Would need a good eyepiece magnifier.
Click to expand...

I guess it comes with practice but I can never see why it's a problem because an image is either in focus or not and a shallow depth of field is easier to focus than a bigger one, even when it's bouncing around. If you stop down the aperture of the scope to increase the depth of field it becomes progressively harder to focus and eventually with a really small aperture and big depth of field it's almost impossible to focus by eye. My way of working is to quickly refocus every shot so over the years I think I've done it that many times that I don't think about it now. I had the pair of these fuijinon teleconverters stacked together yesterday giving me in the region of 7X to 8X magnification and I could still focus it hand held on my broken tripod.


Puteri said:
Someone on eBay is asking a Buy It Now price of $69.99 for that very same model.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Fujinon-X2-Extender-Lens-Model-CE20-1-/350265310073?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item518d707b79#ht_500wt_1156
Click to expand...

Thanks Puteri, I saw that one yesterday while looking around for information. Doesn't seem to be all that much info on the web about this converter.

Paul.
 
Bit difficult to pinpoint something when there's so little info around.

Anyone could put whatever price they wanted on something, but it doesnt mean it will sell. Best to watch to see if it gets bought
 
Took this image this morning, it's uncropped from around 20 feet range. Not bad for 1800mm hand held at 1/50sec.

Paul.
 

Attachments

  • Robin_fujinon.jpg
    Robin_fujinon.jpg
    183.7 KB · Views: 213
ye gods, are you on some kind of medication that calms you down that much !!!. Sure shows the Fujinon's potential, pitty the weather is so naff at the moment.
 
Thats a goodun for sure. Do you see that much better IQ with that weird Fujinon, than any other 2x TC or 2x Barlow that you've ever tried in the past ?
 
Musoman said:
Thats a goodun for sure. Do you see that much better IQ with that weird Fujinon, than any other 2x TC or 2x Barlow that you've ever tried in the past ?
Click to expand...

Having it as close as possible to the camera it gives dead on 3X so for a 3X teleconverter I'd say it's very good, amazingly good compared to say a Kenko Pro 3X. Comparing it to 2X teleconverters I'd say better than them as well but the high magnification puts it in its own category really. It's a tiny bit soft in the corners and a little CA present in the corners too. Mounting it slightly further away from the camera would cure that but I found magnification ramps up very quickly as you move it away from the camera. You can easily get it to 4X or 5X with quite a small macro tube. Cropping the image slightly would also cure the corner softness but I'm being really picky as it's no worse than the average camera lens. As a high mag solution it's very good though.

The Miranda telenegative I took out of the 75-300mm lens is about the same in quality but slightly less mag at 2.3X and they also ramp up pretty quick as you move them further from the camera. This sort of option would be the best starting point for good quality mid range magnification.

For low power I tend to use my Antares 1.6X barlow or Kenko Pro 1.4X but if I was on a trip out I'd probably choose the Antares first and have the Miranda or Fujinon for the far away stuff.

Paul.
 
Last edited:
I've wondered for a while now about those telenegs from inside of a zoom lens. Does the actual zoom affect how much mag. you get from a teleneg ?

For instance, your 75-300 ( 300 div. by 75 ) = 4 mag ?

a 70-210 teleneg. ( 210 div. by 70 ) = 3 mag ?

a 28-70 teleneg. ( 70 div. by 28 ) = 2.5 mag ?

I'm not sure if that how you calc those telenegs, but would the lower power zooms be slightly better than the higher power ones for IQ do you think ?
 
So far 4 of mine have give the same magnification, about 2.3X and a 5th one gave a lot more but with some distortion.

The ones that were the same were from a Praktica 80-200mm, Sigma DL 75-300mm, Miranda 75-300mm and Vivitar 70-210mm. These all seem to be 3 or 4 element designs, very well corrected with no extra CA than what the scope gives which is virtually zero anyway. Sharpness on all of them is about the same and only real differences seem to be in depth of field. So far the Miranda has the largest depth of field and is virtually flat to the corners. All these lenses have a lower number in the 70-80mm range so maybe that's the thing that governs the mag on the scope as they are all about the same.

The Tokina SD 35-200mm gave around 4X with a little corner softness and some CA but there was an obvious difference to the lens design when compared to the others.

I'm guessing it's all the other elements at the back of the lens that provide the real differences in magnification but I'd love to find one that could give around 1.5X or thereabouts.

I tried a low power zoom that was 28-70mm and that was a completely different design altogether inside. There was no usable classic type of telenegative like you find in the longer zooms. I've got a few more coming up on my ebay watch list, I'm mainly after some branded lenses like a faulty Canon or Nikon that I can get cheap just to see if the glass quality is any different.

Paul.
 
Excellent info

I have some regular 2x TC's here ( no Barlows any more though ) basically a Panagor and a Vivitar, both PK mount, fully manual without contacts. By comparison, the Panagor is deeper in size from front to back and weighs significantly more then the Viv.

I plan to keep the Panagor as is, cos it just seems better built, but i may chuck a teleneg into the cheaper looking / feeling Viv. It was dead cheap, (as was the Panagor), so no worries about butchering.

I have a Tokina SD 70-210 on the way, so we'll see whats what.

Also, which may surpise you, i took a shot with the 120/600 today, bit hurried but the IQ is so much better than what i was getting previously with the 80ED at the beginning ( remember that ? ) , but i think this was down to the Canon 450D. I havent a clue why, but although i got round the problems in the end with careful PP work, i wasnt really happy.

There is a hint of CA, just like you said, but i knew this already, as i research everything i buy until i'm almost falling asleep

So, this good IQ could well be down to moving to the Pentax K200 body
 
Musoman said:
There is a hint of CA, just like you said, but i knew this already, as i research everything i buy until i'm almost falling asleep
Click to expand...

I'm the same, I rarely commit to anything without researching loads, reading reviews and stuff.

A Pentax eh, I wouldn't mind another Pentax as I had one before and a lot of my scope mounts are in Pentax K mount which I adapt to the Canon with an adapter ring.

Paul.
 
Paul Corfield said:
I guess it comes with practice but I can never see why it's a problem because an image is either in focus or not and a shallow depth of field is easier to focus than a bigger one, even when it's bouncing around. If you stop down the aperture of the scope to increase the depth of field it becomes progressively harder to focus and eventually with a really small aperture and big depth of field it's almost impossible to focus by eye. My way of working is to quickly refocus every shot so over the years I think I've done it that many times that I don't think about it now. I had the pair of these fuijinon teleconverters stacked together yesterday giving me in the region of 7X to 8X magnification and I could still focus it hand held on my broken tripod.

Took this image this morning, it's uncropped from around 20 feet range. Not bad for 1800mm hand held at 1/50sec.
Click to expand...

Very true...must practice a lot to steady my arms, even with my tripod locked. But with the much dimmed light (with TCs) and failing eyesight, it's going to be an uphill battle. Wish I was here 20 yrs younger LOL. Since focusing screen may not be very helpful, I am thinking of getting the magnifying eye piece http://cgi.ebay.com/2-3x-Angle-View...Accessories&hash=item35aaa16ca7#ht_3994wt_901. Anybody tried this and any good?

You are virtually turn the scope into a magnifying glass. It wouldn't be too long before your find microscopic effect LOL.

Musoman said:
I've wondered for a while now about those telenegs from inside of a zoom lens. Does the actual zoom affect how much mag. you get from a teleneg ?

For instance, your 75-300 ( 300 div. by 75 ) = 4 mag ?

a 70-210 teleneg. ( 210 div. by 70 ) = 3 mag ?

a 28-70 teleneg. ( 70 div. by 28 ) = 2.5 mag ?

I'm not sure if that how you calc those telenegs, but would the lower power zooms be slightly better than the higher power ones for IQ do you think ?
Click to expand...

With tele zoom, I guess we should be getting about 70-75% of the magnification you mentioned. Of course, the design of telenegative varies.


That price is butchering, in contrast to what Paul bought.....

thornlv said:
ye gods, are you on some kind of medication that calms you down that much !!!. Sure shows the Fujinon's potential
Click to expand...

This guy keep setting his standard higher and higher that we have trouble getting close needless to say catch him. Good on you Paul, you really keep the motivation growing by the hundred fold..
 
I would forget those magnifying eyepieces. They obscure the metering information in the viewfinder, and they have to be focused too, so you end up having to focus the scope and the eyepiece.

Having said that, they do flip up out of the way for viewing your metering, but you end up with too many things to do before you get your shot.

If you want to experiment with a magnifying eyepiece, get a fixed focus type, not a focusing type like the one you have you linked to
 
Last edited:
Alphan, look for a KPS viewfinder eyepiece - I have one, 1.35x mag (makes a real difference) - whilst still being able to see the metering info, well made and comfortable.
 
Paul Corfield said:
I'm the same, I rarely commit to anything without researching loads, reading reviews and stuff.

A Pentax eh, I wouldn't mind another Pentax as I had one before and a lot of my scope mounts are in Pentax K mount which I adapt to the Canon with an adapter ring.

Paul.
Click to expand...

Sold my Canon here - £450

I picked the K200D up from LCE for £299 C/w 18-55 kit lens, and they threw in a Manual, + SDHC Usb 2 reader

Gave me £150 spare for goodies ;)
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

dwatsonbirder
Kowa TSN-501 - a brief review
Replies
10
Views
3K
Hermann
Hermann
B
Attaching a Red Dot Finder OVER a stay-on spotting scope case
Replies
1
Views
1K
Mike Crawley
Mike Crawley
J
Kowa TSN1, TSN3 Baader Hyperion MK IV zoom
Replies
3
Views
2K
jrp jr
J
D
Athlon Optics Cronus 8.5x42 UHD Review
Replies
5
Views
7K
PhilR.
P
Troubador
Harpia 95: A Review on a Scottish Island
3 4 5
Replies
88
Views
21K
Troubador
Troubador

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top