i want a wide lens attachment that is not costly. i found one that is 58mm, but it wasn't recomended for the GL2. would any 58mm fit? also would anyone suggest a certain one that won't break the bank? thanks.

If the lens you are looking at is for a still camera, it probably won't work. Look around for a used WD58- They can be found for around $100 to $130.

I am just wondering how many people use the Canon wide angle lens on their GL2 all the time?
I am getting sick of taking it on and off all the time and would rather just leave it on.

So I guess I am asking if you are in a situation where you really don't need the Wide angle, do you take it off? or just leave it on for simplicity sake?

Thanks for your input.

My WD58H is a permanent attachment to the camera. I can't remember when I last removed it.

Well seeing as I'm not shooting all day, everyday I probably don't get as annoyed as others, but I remove mine. I don't like the barell distortion that's obvious when looking at things like doorways.


Aaron

Jeff,

I shoot with the WD58H attached all the time as it gives me shots that I would otherwise not achieve.

I use mine all the time. As for barrel distortion, you should zoom in a bit to lose it. You'll end up with the same shot as if you'd taken the lens off...

Robin.

Hi everyone!

I got my WD58H to day and I'm planing to leave it on permanent. But I'm conserned about quality loss when using zoom. Will the WD58H influence the images when I use zoom ?


Vidar

Hi,
I´m in the process of buying a wide angle adaptor form my XM2.

I´m trying to decide if I should go for 0.7x or 0.5x.

I will be using it for fiction on small spaces, and events, mainly on-stage concert shooting.

Unfortunately around here, I can´t find anything in between these two sizes.

I know the 0.5x will be fine for the concerts, but I´m a bit scared that it will be too much "angle" for fiction.

What do you think?

Yes on certrain shots with a .5x you will probably see some vignetting. Might not be obvious in some places but it'll be there. Just depends how important that exra reach is to you. A .7 should not have this problem

Federico - I highly recommend canon's WD-58h. If you research around the forums a bit you'll see that this is a highly revered option for the GL1/2 and the XM1/2. I can recommend it myself - I shoot almost enitrely with the adapter on my GL1 and have been extremely pleased. Minimal distortion, considerable wide angle of view, and moderately priced - it's just a good mix.

I´d love to get the Canon... but unfortunately, this item is almost impossible to find here, and where available it goes for more than 300 Euros.. which is way too much for me right now.

Right now I can´t afford that, and I need It NOW.. so I´m looking into the few available options...
Which are very few.. and then I´ll upgrade when possible.

Anyway, I thought of getting the Raynox .65X but not available either, so I´m left with a .50 and a .70 and some hama but it has a 56mm thread diameter.

I don´t care too much about the vigneting, for the concerts I shoot I know it´s not a problem.. and for fiction I´ll be cropping for wide screen.

What worries me is that the barrel distortion will give me an excesive look for the fiction..

I need to buy a wide angle lens for my GL2 I already have the Century Optics Fisheye, but need something with no distortion. I film houses and need the widest angle possible without any distortion. Also I would like input on these cheap wide angle off eBay. My house tours are put on the internet, and are compressed a lot, so do I need to spend the money on the name brand? Some of these on eBay are going from $30-80.

Also I need a good light, I have a NGR that screws onto my camera, but it's only 50w (non-adjustable), I need something brighter that is going to light up a room (much more watts), and would also like it to be adjustable. Right now I'm using a shop light; it's working great but it a pain to take around and slows my shooting down. I would like to just hook it on my camera and move from room to room.

Thanks for the help.

The WD-58H is the best deal and perhaps best performer for a wide-angle, sub-fish-eye adapter. It's very good glass at a very modest price. Frankly, it's a crime to put cheap, slow glass full of aberrations in front of the GL2's outstanding lens. It basically degrades the entire camera.

Go over to the "Photon" forum for input on lights. You'll find a substantial body of information on the subject there.

If you consider how much the WD-58H sells for (not to mention any of the Century Optics lenses), I wouldn't think anything that sells for in the price range you described would be worth purchasing.

Just my 2 cents worth.


Regards,

Rocky

First of all i just want to apologize if the things i ask has already been talked about a million times (And that my english sucks! :D )

I bought a GL2 cam a few weeks ago (actually a XM2, i live in Sweden) Anyway, i´ve realized that i need:
1) A microphone
2) A wide angel lens

I want a small microphone that works great when shooting documentarys (you know like following a guy and interviewing him while his walking around in a mall or something)
I´ll be handling all things on my own (no crew) and there fore i want a microphone that i just can attatch to the cam and then know that it will be a good sound. No fuzz!
I´ve been suggested to buy the Sennheiser MKE-300 but i think it´s to big! I need a smaller one...

The wide angel lens i just want one thats good but costs a litter less. I don´t really want to spend all that money that the WD-58H costs.

Would be great if you could help me, and perhaps give me a suggestion or two about other things that would be great to have with my cam.
Thanks!

Hey Oskar,

Your English is fine!

I just picked up a used Canon WD-58 on Ebay for $100. It didn't come with the lens hood, but I can spend the money on that one when and if I ever need it. I have seen them sell there for even less.

There are other manufacturers of accessory lenses for these cameras, but many of them are not as good as the Canon, and you will see the difference in your footage.

Regarding microphones, there are no easy answers. I have an Azden SGM-1x shotgun, which works pretty well. Not perfect at all, but I always seem to think that there is a better solution than I have to use at the moment.

The Sennheiser is another moderately priced shotgun, which I haven't used, but I assume its going to give similar results. I expect that a shotgun mic is the best solution for the situation you described. These microphones need to be pretty long. You can probably find a smaller one than the MKE-300, but keep in mind that they make them in that shape and size for a good reason.

I have recently been shooting a documentary in which the interviewer has been holding a Shure SM-58 vocal mic, and mixing that with my Azden Shotgun for ambient sound. The difference in sound quality is HUGE, versus just using the shotgun!

I can only assume that a really expensive shotgun is going to give you better results than these ones. Maybe a really expensive one would be smaller. I haven't used them, so I can't give you specific advice.

Good luck!

Thanks for your answer!

Oh, i forgot to say that i would prefer a microphone with mini-tele so i don´t need to buy that XLR-thing also!

How about the Sony ECM-MS908? Or will that be worthless for me?

My personal opinion is that it is better to go with an XLR microphone, so when you expand to two microphones, connect to a mixer, etc. in the future, it will still be usable. You will definitely need to have an adapter to connect the XLR to the camera. You can go with the box that Canon makes (MA-300, which uses up the hot shoe on top of the camera), the nice Beachtek adapter (which I am sorry I didn't know about before I bought the MA-300), or get a cable converter from XLR to 3.5mm. Shure makes one - the A96F. This was all well discussed in the Audio section several months back.

Look at the following thread...

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22353

Yeah a cable converter from XLR to 3.5mm would be a solution...So now when i got the cable, all i need is the microphone... :D

How about the SGM-X? I don´t even need an adapter for that one

I added a Canon DM-50 mike not long ago. Very pleased with it and a simple dump into the hot shoe. I dub a lot of track over camcorder sound so mostly I need a directional for interviews or specific sound where Im "filming" the sound. I.E, autmobile exhausts, etc. It works well for the tasks I ask.

On the wide angle lens, I just picked one up but have a newbie question on it. Its a 0.42X AF Wide Angle. Just fitted adaptor ring and screwed onto front of GL2. The view is spectacular but Im getting the black halo from the lens border hood. Not really a hood, just the end of the lens. At full wide angle, the halo is as like a black circle around my footage, and shady at best at full zoom.

Im not using is with the GL2 hood on. Im sure Im doing something stupid here. I just put the WA Lens on an hour ago. What do I need to do to remove the black halo?

So the problem with buying a lens for $40 on eBay might be that the picture will be all messed up? just a useless thing to buy at a low price maybe?
Or is it a problem also with more expensive models like the WD-58H?

Some good replies here folks. The danger of buying any lens of ebay is that it might be damaged. Any slight marks to the front element will show up badly on footage shot through it as the depth of field will be huge and the front element can be actually in focus in the sunshine. Beware.

I'd also post a warning about the Sennheiser MKE 300 Oskar. Make sure you get the 'D' (for digital) version as there's a lot of hum with the cheaper version. Sennheisser Sweden can do the internal modification for you if you get the original version. I know you think it's too big, but it'll be better than the Sony 908. The 300 is mono only, you realise?

Chris - you're seeing vignetting - a very common occurance with powerful wide-angle converters that are physically too small. The big 58mm filter thread and the VAP OIS on the front of the GL2 mean that you need big glass to give a 0.42x magnification of the image. I'd go with Brian's WD 58 suggestion - this is a fine lens, though not very powerful.

Oscar - look at the Raynox site - they make fine wide-angle converters.

tom.

OK, help me with this:
A camshop here in Sweden sell two type of lenses.
One has "0,7" and the otherone has "0,3", which one of these two is the "best"? I mean, which one gives the most wide angel, 0,3 or 0,7?

The 0,3 is more wide angle than the 0,7.

The figure is a multiplication factor Oskar. So if you have a 6 mm to 60 mm 10x zoom, a 0,5x converter will change this to a 3 mm to 30 mm zoom.

If you're thinking of buying one of these lenses (0,3x or 0,7x) then I would suggest that you try them on your camcorder before you buy. The 0,3x will distort straight lines a lot, whereas the 0,7x will only distort them a little. The 0,3x is much more likely to vignette the image too - and give you black corners to your frame.

tom.

I found on BHphoto Kenko KR-W075 58mm 0,75mm wide adapter for 79,95$. It sounds much, much cheaper then Canon ones. I need wide for my XM2, so I am considering this Kenko. Any experience with this lens, and are they zoom-through?

Hi Darko, We just purchased what I think was a Kenko wd for my sons 1 chip canon. They said it was a zoom through. At about 1/3 of the way through everything gets very soft. We also bought a WD-58 canon lens for our GL-2 and it is definately zoom through and does a great job. The Kenyo does a great job at wide but thats all. The cost for the Kenyo was about 50 or 75 dollars and I think the WD-58 was around 300 dollars.

Thank you, Terry. I'll go with Kenko. 1/3 of the way seems ok for framing purposes. I am planning to use wide converter on few occasions anyway, not the whole time. For that purpose 75$ is simply a great price.

I have a Kenko 0.7x single element non zoom-through and it works well. Being a spherical element means it barrel distorts, but it's nicely coated and is a lot more compact and is considerably lighter than my zoom-through w'angle converters.

I tend to prefer non zoom-through as generally you can go to about half way before the image blurrs out, and anyway, the camera's zoom lens always works better without any added chunnks of glass placed in front of it.

tom.

What is the best wide angle lens for the GL2 camcorder - in terms of quality of picture, guality glass, etc.

Your top two choices are the Canon WD-58H wide-angle adapter, and a comparable model or two from Century Optics. These adapters have been discussed frequently on this forum... try a search using those terms and browse through the results; you'll find a lot of feedback about both.

From what I have gleaned from the other threads, it seems like the choice is between the Canon WD-58H and the Century Optics .65. What is not clear to me is whether or not the Century Optics is worth the extra cost. I've seen one thread where one person appears to have used both, but that's the only actual "real life" comparison I could find.

I am trying to get some sense from folk who have used both how much of a difference there is. For example, do they both give the same field of vision, or is one different? Does one have more distortion, or are they the same. If there are differences, how noticeable are they?

just for general questions: what is the best way to clean my wide angle?

Stephen, What are you going to use the wide angle lens for. I have the Century Optics .3 fisheye which is very distorted, but shows from ceiling to floor.

I also have the .55 Century Optics, shows quite a bit, just about no distortion.

I film house tours, and have a need for both, in post I can correct for the distortion caused by the fisheye. But the .55 is much more convinent.

I will use it for video taping school concerts, and other inside events where I need to get a wide angle. I'm trying to get a comparison of the Canon WD-58H and the Century Optics .65 (if there is another Century Optics that is a better option that the .65, I'd like that comparison as well).

From what I've seen, the WD-58H is probably your best bet. It is full zoom through and there is no distortion/vignetting. I wouldn't imagine that the Century Optics wide angle lense would be too much better.

I would still like to hear from anyone who has actual real life experience with both lens - is there anyone out there who has used both? Or had a chance to compare them in a store?

I use the Canon and it's got excellent optics. I can't imagine the Century Optics being better enough to justify the cost. It's a very good wide angle lens.

I use the Canon and find it excellent. I certainly agree with Bob, Jack, et al about cost justification and the quality of the lens.

Sandy

I use the Raynox.

REALLY worth the money!!!

http://www.raynox.co.jp/

I've tested the Century 0.65 (bayonet mount on a VX2000) against a Raynox, Kenko, Cavision and others. Not the Canon though. Of all the zoom-throughs the Century was the best. Mind you, it was the heaviest, most expensive, best coated and sharpest at all apertures and focal lengths. I was impressed.

But one sadness was the barrel distortion. At the price I just felt it distorted too much, and the Bolex Aspheron I now use is much better in taht department. But then again, all converter lenses have their pros as well as cons, and the Aspheron is only a half zoom-through.

tom.

so I have the UV filter and polarizer filter and the tiffen filter which is 58mm, however when using the wide angle lens, there is nothing one can place over the wide angle lens.

when I placed the tiffen filter soft fx3 over the canan gl2 lens and then the wide angle lens, one can see the small dark "spots" of the tiffen filter on the LCD screen.

any advice on what ya'll do with your filters and wide angle lens?

So far, it's been one or the other. Try to get the best footage you can, and apply the filters in post as needed.

I got to this place about a year ago and realised the need for a matt box.

I have 2 adaptors for the matt box:

1/- 58mm

2/- 80mm for the WD

This is THE way to get pola AND a way to mount several filters at once.

Keith - you weren't suggesting pola in post? You weren't suggesting extra ND straights or grads and openning up the iris in post to get that extra DoF . .were you? Nah! You couldn't have meant that?

Sometimes, just sometimes you gotta purchase that which you want/need to actually GET that which you aren't getting!

Grazie

I was suggesting soft filtering in post, the cam has a built-in ND. A matte box will work with the WA lens?

"A matte box will work with the WA lens?" - Yup! I use an adaptor that takes it over the 80mm - great stuff!

G

What matte box? How much?

Keith - I got the Kestrel 16:9 bellows. You get a 58mm and a 80 mm adaptor.


Here yah goes!

http://www.truelens.co.uk/matte/kestrel.htm


Grazie