NEW WIDE ANGLE UNDERWATER ADAPTER
FROM
FATHOM IMAGING

WA-906

The new wide-angle adapter delivers a 92-degree field of view, ( PAL diagonal ), with minimal distortion. Full zoom capability of the camcorder is actually enhanced, instead of limited. High resolution “close-ups”, at full zoom, can be recorded in air when the object is only 6 ½ inches from the port vertex in air and 28 inches from the port vertex in seawater. This enhanced zoom performance eliminates the need for a macro lens.


COMPATIBILITY

1/3 inch CCD, operating in NTSC or PAL format
zoom lens - Min fl > 6.0 mm; @ f/# = 1.6
Max fl < 72 mm; @ f/# = 2.4

Optimized for Sony PD 150 and VX 2000 aspheric camcorder lens.


OPTICAL FEATURES

FULL ZOOM CAPABILITY
Objects as close as 167 mm from the port vertex, (700 mm from port vertex in seawater), can be brought into clear focus while operating the camcorder at full aperture, (f / 2.4), and full-zoom, (fl = 72 mm). Minimum object distances can be reduced significantly when operating at higher f / #.

MINIMUM DISTORTION
Distortion in the extreme corners of the underwater image is limited to less than 4.5 %. The small amount of residual distortion linearly increases with field angle, making any distortion barely perceptible. See attached distortion “Grid Plot”.

COLOR CORRECTION
Low dispersion optical glasses are used in an achromatized optical design to provide excellent color correction at all object distances and zoom settings.

USE IN AIR OR WATER
Nearly constant angular magnification in air and water is a feature of the proprietary port design. During wide-angle operation, the angular magnification difference “in air” versus “in water” is about 2 % for distant objects and about 5% for near objects.
DURABLE OPTICAL COATINGS
All optical surfaces are (H)igh (E)fficiency (B)road (B)and (A)nti-(R)eflection, (HEBBAR), coated. The external surface of the BK7 glass port has a proprietary, seawater resistant, “hard-coat”, which resists scratches and allows aggressive cleaning to remove seawater residue.

HIGH RESOLUTION
Meticulous assembly of precision grade optical components preserves high polychromatic MTF of the optical design. Every Fathom optical component and assembled lens undergoes interferometric testing to ensure consistent optical performance.

WA-906

I just bought a VX2000. I am an ametuer, and would like to learn more about Digital videography. I would like to get a wide angle lens for the camera, but there are so many of them out there. Is it a safe bet to stay with the Sony's VCL-HG0758 which gives only 0.7X or go with something thats better. I am confused. Please help. I am also looking for the tele lens (VCL-HG1758).Is there any video or book to follow to learn all there is to know about using this camera, other than the manual itself. Thanks for your replies in advance.

One more question. I am planning to get the video light. Which one of the Sony's video lights are good. There is one that has a switchable 10/20Watts light. Does it really help. I noticed that the VX2000 is pretty good in low light conditions. But, will the picture be grainy in low light ? Please help.

Re: nwide angle adapters, the Canon 58mm fits the Sony VX2000 just fine and is a superb value for the money... less than $200.

The Sony .7 may not be wide enough for your taste. The .58 that Chris mentioned might have too much distortion for your taste, but seems like a good value, the century optics.65 is somewhere in between, and is reported to not bend to much at the perimeters and got a good review in DV magazine, down side is it is $400. street price.

The Canon is not a .58x -- it has a 58mm thread which means it'll screw onto the front of the Sony. It's about a .7x and has absolutely zero distortion. A superb value for the money at about $180. I read Adam's review in DV Magazine and agree with the faults he found in the Century adapter. Knowing him personally, it bothers me a little that Adam says it's the best he's tried. In my experience, the Canon is much better than the Century. Hope this helps,

Hey - We're all amatures at some point... (some of us longer than others...ha!)


I have a Vx2000 and used both the Kenko .65 and the Canon - Go with the Canon, you won't be the least bit sorry.

"The Canon is not a .58x -- it has a 58mm thread "

...oops, might help to read.

How noticable is the difference between .65 and .7? I have read posts of people disappointed that a .7 not wide enough. I have a century optics .6 (for sale by the way). for a JVC DV500(sold). It does have a bit of distortion, but I still like it.

I had a few Kenkos for a PC-1 and an old hi-8, I would not buy Kenko again.

I also have the century optics fisheye for a PC100, that is a gas, highly recommend it.

Is the canon that everyone recommends the Wide Converter WD-58?

Thanks!

Canon WD-58. Yes, that's the one.

saw that zgc had the optex wide angle for $299 and was wondering if anyone out there had used it???

any other experiences with vx2000 compatable wide angle lenses greatly appreciated as well...

thanks in advance for all replies,

willaim

Although I have read that people prefer the Canon lense - I love the Sony -
VCL-0752H wide conversion lense - It rarely comes off of my VX 2000. The price is in the same range - and there is a slight 'vignette-ing' on the corners when it is fully wide (outside the 'safe' area) but I think it vastly improves the 'look' of the camera - it is my most used camera accessory.

Chris,

Here is a question that I could not find a definitive answer to.

1. Is it true that the 58 mm threads on the VX2000 are plastic?

I just can not tell the difference by feel, and I do not want to find out by using a magnet. I saw the other posting regarding this topic by electricweasel, but I am not sure if century is correct in saying that the threads are plastic. It would be amazing to me if sony used plastic threads on a $2800 camera.

If the 58mm threads are plastic, I do not like the idea of having to screw different filters on and off the lens, due to possible wear and tear over time. Due to this, I have been pondering purchasing Century's Rectangular Sunshade/Glass Filterholder (DS-FH44-00), and Schneider 4x4 filters. You can see these at:

http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/video/digital/digsunfiltr.html

What are your thoughts on this? I am inclinded to purchase one for the convenience of not having to screw filters on and off my VX2000, and because Schneider filters are so good. Thanks.

Could someone please advise on what should the mount type be on the wide angle adapter for the PD150? It is not clear to me whether it should be the screw mount (58mm), or the bayonet mount (58mm)? The different wide angle adapters listed on the B&H site sometimes are described as screw mount/58mm, but others are described as bayonet mount/for Sony PD150 and VX2000.

Also, is the mount on VX2000 and PD150 different? Does one have the bayonet mount, and the other regular screw mount?

Does the Sony .7 wide adapter fit onto the PD150? (it is the screw mount type).

Thanks very much!

Found a reply to my question in one of the earlier threads (by electricweasel). Thanks!

I've just received my Canon WD-58 and attached it to my PD150P and with all due respect to Chris Hurd the lens shows considerable barrel distortion, something I never noticed with the Sony converter that came with the PD100. The distortion is not subtle; I'd post a .jpg here but apparently this feature is not enabled on this board.

Also, I tried to find out beforehand what sort of protective filter or shade I could get for the WD-58 and couldn't find any info on thread size. As it turns out, the WD-58 has no threads on the front element. Even though the PD100's wide angle converter has a dodgy and easily breakable shade at least it has one!

Hmm... is it too late to return it? You should be able to get a full refund. I don't actually have a PD150, but a good friend of mine in Austin uses this WA with his VX2000 and I've never heard him complain about it.

I use the WD-58 and have NO distortion issues at all. Is there a small possibility that the lens is not sitting properly on the thread?

LOU

Chris,

I bought the converter for my next assignment, a three country tour of East Timor, Indonesia and Thailand. But since I'm not in the States and was unsure of the availability of the lens in Australia I had my sister send one on to me from the US. I may be too late both to return it and to get another converter in time.

In this same thread, Jeff Smith mentioned that "The .58 that Chris mentioned might have too much distortion for your taste". Perhaps, like golden-eared audiophiles, we are the only two who can see (hear) the distortion.

I've put up a page so others can see what I'm beginning to rant about:

http://www.geocities.com/m_natsume/canon_wd-58.html

I just bought my vx2000 and looking for a good external mic, somethihg like a shoot gun mic? do i have to add any adaptor to use a shoot gun mic? what are those XRL about?? Also, does anyone know any good tripod for this camera?

The easiest shotgun microphone to use with the 2000 has to be the Sennheiser MKE-300 which costs around $180 from the major resellers. It connects directl into the 1/8" microphone socket without any adapters. It has a shoe adapter so it mounts directly onto the VX-2000.

A less expensive shotgun would be the Philmore which sells at discount for around $80. Not nearly as good as the Sennheiser, it does work OK but is quite large.

The next step up would be something like the AT-835B which, at around $235 plus a mount of some type, costs a lot more. It has a XLR output so you need at least a wire-style adapter if not a transformer adapter before you can plug it into the VX-2000.

For a tripod, I recommend the Libec TH-M20C if you want a light, quick-setting ENG-style tripod with a ball and claw arrangement for leveling. If you want a more flexible but slower setup tripod, take a look at the Manfrotto or Bogens.

Consider purchasing a 58 mm UV filter to be permanently mounted on the front of your lens. It is the sacrificial glass should something nasty try and touch your lens.

I was trying some mics todat at Cinequip in Toronto. Terry their sound man set up an MKE300 which I found to be totally useless. The mount transmits everything including operationg the controls. You really need something with a shock mount.

I ran a ME66 and a AT835B straight into the VX2K (XLR to mini stereo) with no problem. We tried the BeachTek and the only difference was a slight signal strength loss. Of the 2 mics the ME was more open but also more prone to distort (sibilance among other things).

The mic I really liked was the EW112 evolution wireless by Sennheiser for an extra 225canadian ( $140 US ) you can buy a plug in tranmitter that'l make any mike wireless.

The base kit was $450 US or 725 can$. That would be about the same as B&H but with prestty darn good service.

The soubd guy wasn't too impressed by the Beach Tec.

We use a MKE-300 at the local community college with no noise pickup problems at all. Any of the shotguns will pick up air borne noise. The MKE is probably one of the hottest microphones around so it's extra sensitivity may be the culprit. We tent to operate the cameras with remote controls so maybe that solves the problem.

I have the Evolution system and it is good. But it does effect the sound quality somewhat. They don't have a shotgun in the series so I can only guess that you were working with the lav and body transmitter (I don't have the model number lookup table immediately to hand right now).

The plug-in transmitter (sugar cube) has a few limitations. On low output microphones it sometimes cannot transmitt a really strong audio signal. Even though one can select the microphone sensitivity. It DOES work very well with my AT 835B however.

The Studio 1 XLR adapter box seems to work very well. I've used it a lot over the last year with a VX-1000 and both Lavaliere, the Evolution wireless, and an AT 835B all owned by the local community college theatre group.

I've heard a few disparaging remarks about the BeachTek but many people like them too.

Funny , thst was the combo I was thinking of. the AT835 with the plug in (sugar cube). I really like the freedom offered by the Evolution.

Just clip it on someone and send them where ever. same with the AT on a pole.

Are the limitations liveable? Does the convenience outweigh any loss?

Would I be better off getting a better mic to go with the transmitter? (lottsa questions :))

The plug in xmitter is a skp100
The body pack is an SK100
the mike was a lav model ME2

Thanks for the input
beas

Any wireless is subject to interference so that can be a problem
so you really do need to have a wired alternative available to you.

You will also need a shock-mount for the pole. The combination of the microphone and cube transmitter is a bit heavy for the very nice AT 8410A shock mount. There is another, less expensive mount that would be better in this case. Or you could replace the shock cords with a slightly stronger version

Be very careful with the lav microphone. Not that it is too fragile but the replacement cost is listed at $350 US.

Buy an extra set of antennae for the transmitter and receiver (be careful, there are different ones for each frequency set) and get a spare output cable. The antennae are easy to lose and the output cable does get a bit of wear and tear.

I've already had a director drop the body pack transmitter about 3 feet onto a concrete floor. I cannot even find a mark on it. Operation is unimpared.

Don't forget to use a headphone :-))

"Consider purchasing a 58 mm UV filter to be permanently mounted on the front of your lens. It is the sacrificial glass should something nasty try and touch your lens.'

i had one before I bought the cam. One thing bugged me though the filter threads are soft plastic and very easy to cross thread. have you experience that. I'll try and find a 58mm male to 58mm female to thread in and leave.

I'd expect to spend around $40 or so for a good filter. At that price, they are metal threads. It is easy to grasp the filter tight enough to distort the ring and prevent it from unscrewing. You can get a filter wrench that will remove a stubborn filter.

I have always found that If I apply a combination of squeeze and pressure on the face, not edge of the filter frame that I can eventually get them off. Many have a bit of knurling right at the front outside edge that helps one get a grip.

You misunderstand,the Sony lens has a crappy, cheap plastic filter thread. My filter has a metal thread. I'm really surprised that a camera of that value is so bloody cheap in areas.

My old TRV20 has a metal filter ring.I'm trying to find if others have experienced this. Normally a filter screws on with ease. This lense you have to reverse thread the sucker (turn the filter backwards untill the threads line up then forward.)

I've had manual cameras since I was 12 years old. (45 years, I guess that makes me older than dirt.)but I'm relatively new to video and eager to learn. There are a whole new set of rules with video and audio production. It's actually a lot more exciting.

Your doing an excellent job Mike, thanks for the quick and fact filled responses.

Beas

About wide conversion lense for VX2000:

which wide conversion lense is good for the VX2000? so far i just know two models: VCL-MHG07A and VCL-HG0758. Why is the VCL-HG0758 so much expensive than the VCL-MHG07A? Is the VCL-MHG07A good enough for my VX2000?



About shotgun for VX2000:

i was looking for some kind of shotgun that i can use it with a shock mount AND can mount it directly to the VX2000. Because in some environments i can't hold the mount. Does AT-835B do that? How about Sennheiser's MKE-300? Which one is better?

Thanks for your advises.

Leo

About wide conversion lense for VX2000:

which wide conversion lense is good for the VX2000? so far i just know two models: VCL-MHG07A and VCL-HG0758. Why is the VCL-HG0758 so much expensive than the VCL-MHG07A? Is the VCL-MHG07A good enough for my VX2000?



About shotgun for VX2000:

i was looking for some kind of shotgun that i can use it with a shock mount AND can mount it directly to the VX2000. Because in some environments i can't hold the mount. Does AT-835B do that? How about Sennheiser's MKE-300? Which one is better?

thanks for your advise.

Leo

On Sony's Web site, they don't give enough information to make an intelligent selection between the two lens. However, it would appear that the more expensive lens has more lens elements, perhaps better glass (or glass instead of plastic). Based on price alone, one would expect better performance out of the $400 model. Resolution, Modulation Transfer Function, distortion, color, and other factors can contribute to the price and difference between the two lens.

The AT835B and the MKE-300 are different animals in many ways.

1. The AT is a pro microphone with lots of real-world, pro users out there. You can purchase many 3rd party accessories for this microphone including all of the wind-suppression accessories. It is an all-metal body and has a balanced XLR output. Cost with mount will be around $300. You will have to piece together the mount although I'd consider using a 'L' handle on the 2000 and mounting the microphone to that.

2. The MKE-300 is designed for amateur use, it is of plastic construction, has an attached foam windscreen which is useless in anything over a very mild breeze. It also has a miniplug output and an attached shoe mount. It will cost about $180.

At first blush, the MKE would seem to be a good match. Personally I think the unit has some real problems with durability, noise pickup through the shoe mount, and the unbalanced output which really hurts if you try to put the microphone on a boom.

But that's just me.

hi
take a look at www.centuryoptics.com
these lenses have some advantages over Sony's as more rugged mount and sunshade. have prooved to be optically good

Mike has already answered this question in another thread so I am editing to let poeple know that...

I searched the forums and found one thread that kinda covered the topic of polarizing filters for wide angle lenses, but i am still confused. Am i right that there are no polarizing filters for Wide Angle lenses(Optex)? How about diffusion, uv, or grad? I've looked around but have been unsuccesful thus far.
In the thread that i remarked on previously, it said that there was a solution but it was mucho expensive..which doesn't seem worth it. any suggestions? thanks.

I am wondering why you can't find a filter for this. Is it that you can't find one big enough to screw in or is there some reason it won't work with the wide angle?
I would look over at B&H in the photography section, I bought a circular polarizer filter for my still camera lenses there a few years ago. I think it was about $200 or more but it has 82mm threads which screw into the front of my lenses. You could also look for one that fits in a large square filter to drop into a filter holder/lens hood/mat box. I know Schneider makes one. Check out this link for the listings.

http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/filters/polarizers/index.htm

i just bought a century optics 0.65x and a B+W UV filter for my pd150.
i guess this may be a silly question, but after trying i can't help but come to the conclusion that in order to fit on the WA adaptor, i have to first remove the UV filter which is usually screwed on to protect the camera lense. is this true? i didn't want to try too hard to place the WA adaptor on top of the filter, for fear of scratching the filter.

You're right, I wouldn't bother with the UV filter in this case. Just be very careful moving the camera around when the WA adapter is mounted.

May I suggest that you test the WA adapter very carefully before your return priveleges expire.

After shooting scenes in adequate light (finally) with mine, I decided the focus was just too soft to be acceptable.

So I returned the WA adapter to Century for testing. Their report was that the adapter is performing very well and is very sharp. Hmmm. I'll try it again on my system with a waveform monitor to set focus. Maybe my 150 still has a backfocus problem but that has not been apparent in normal use.

I recieved a wide angle lense as a gift. With focus set to infinity, the upper corners are cut off - noticable but not overwhelming. Is this a defective lense?

I've been using a Sony .7x wide adaptor on my VX-2000 for awhile and have generally been happy, but have wanted some sort of lens shade to use with. Not ready to pony up hundreds of $$$ on a matte box (yet :-), I came across a simple, durable, inexpensive solution that might interest others.

At my local Ace Hardware I bought a rubber pipe reducing coupling. This is a heavy black rubber fitting that uses hose clamps to join two different sized PVC or iron drain pipes. The 3" to 4" adaptor was just about the right diameter for the Sony .7x lens. I cut some excess rubber off the 3" end with a utility knife and made some small slits so it would fit over the lens more easily, then used the supplied hose clamp to attach it to the lens. After mounting on the lens I observed the amount of vignetting, then trimmed the excess rubber from the 4" end.

The result was something that looked much more like a piece of photographic equipment than a sewer pipe connection, and it works perfectly. Total cost was about $5.00 and it took maybe 15 minutes. Take a look in the plumbing section at your local hardware - the model I bought is the 3" to 4" adaptor #PCX 56-43.

Great idea.

I also have the Sony .7 wide angle lens and I too seem to have focus problems fully zoomed in through the wide angle lens. It does seem to mimic a back focus problem like broadcast cameras.

Pity it doesn't have a back focus adjustment like the broadcast cameras.

For whaterver it's worth, I took my lens and mounted it on someones VX-1000 and it did not have a focus problem like my 150. Wish I had a line into the Sony Engineers....

If you call the Sony pro help line, you can sometimes talk directly with a sony engineer through them.

FWIW, the 800 number pro hotline for we PD-150 owners is very useful.

thanks mike for the tip on testing focus with adapter. i'll test the back focus as well.
any other tests you think i should try before using the pd for a shoot / warranty expires?

I just got a Canon WD-58H which I use with my pd150 and it's great, I haven't had any of these focusing problems and there is surprisingly little distortion around the edges when at full WA. The best part is that is came with a lens hood which means I don't have to use any more tin can lens hoods for my old WA lens and TRV900.

does the Century lense have a much wider angle than the Canon one?

Century Optics makes a .55x .65x and .3x (fish eye). Where as the Canon is .7x the same as the Sony .7x but at half the cost. I paid about $350 CND before taxes for the Canon, Sony wanted something like $650 CND before taxes. Both provide the same image quality and the Canon even comes with a lens hood.

The only thing that seperates the different Century optics wide angle lens's is their ability to zoom. With the .65x lens you have full zoom capability, the .55x only has partial, and I don't believe that the fish eye has any zoom. Most of the Century Optics WA's are over $900 CND.

So yeah the Century lense does have a much wider angle than the Canon, but you must be prepared to pay for it.

I am hesistant about ordering this expensive lense. Some users are pleased with it and for others it gives too much distortion making their footage look "amateurish".

Anyone know any really good honest examples up on the web so I can make a better judgment?

Would anyone recommend this lense for filmmaking - dramatic story telling?

That's the best wide angle available for the VX, I think. However, it has no filter threads in the front---if that's important. A friend of mine has the Kenko, the top grade model. It's mich cheaper, very solid, no distortion that I can see, and also comes with filter threads.

Tiffens are very good. I don't know if they make one for the VX size, though. I believe Canon and Optex also make good ones.

I've searched my bookmarks in vain for the article that persuaded me to buy the Canon WD-58 (0.7 x 58) lens. It was written by a pro shooter whose opinion was that for the money it was the best value. I've used it for some months now with complete satisfaction - but I'm not making my living through the viewfinder [yet :-) ].