I have my HV20 on the way (not from B&H) - and I was just wondering if I could get some advise on "must have" accessories? I am starting from scratch. Needless to say, I am a rookie, and this is not intended for "work" rather family:

Extra Battery - NB-2LH or BP-2L14 ?
Battery Charger - CB-2LW
Sony DVM-12CLE Mini DV Head Cleaning
Sony DVM-60PR's
Blackmagic Intensity HDMI Editing Card
I'd like to get a wide angle converter? WD43?

Anything else? A mic is STILL my biggest uncertain decision. I want a good mic, but not certain what is my best option. I hope to use it often at my family cottage (outdoors on a lake).

Thanks,

Rapo

..here are two Audio Technica mics I have used you might want to check out. They are consumer 3.5mm connectors, this is not pro gear you'd use on a feature or such. Monitor with closed headphones or isolation type in the ear buds ( Sony makes some more inexpensive ones that work in some ears ). These mics are decent for basic dialog and since they aren't balanced XLR type jacks/cords, listen for radio/light ballasts etc. type electrical interference while monitoring. They won't need a converter with the HV20 ( as many pro level mics will ) and they will usually give cleaner results versus inexpensive wireless mic systems costing more than these wired choices. These are not meant to be mounted on the camera, but the lav obviously clipped on your subject and the boundry mic on a table or flat surface for a single or group of subjects.

ATR35s Omni Condenser Omni Lav
ATR97 Omni Condenser Boundry Microphone ( a 2" diameter round disc that can set on a table )
Regards, Alan

Any comments on the WD43, wondering if it is a worth while investment for the HV20.

I have several mike's, but I ordered the Canon DM-50 Directional Stereo mike to try it out. Since it mounts on the hotshoe it would sure be convenient if it works fairly well!

I also bought extra batteries and that is one accessory you should have. B&H is out of the Canon batteries but have another brand listed that is cheaper and slightly higher output. Unlike my XLH1, this camera is small and light and it will go everywhere with me.

Also trying the Raynox HD5050 Pro .5 wide angle adapter.

Mike

The Raynox HD5050 Pro .5 is listed as being a 37mm mount. However the specs says it includes several adapters, most being smaller. However it says it includes a 43mm mount adapter. So how does this work? If the actual unit is 37mm and you put an adapter to make it fit 43mm wouldn't you see vignetting? Am I missing something. Is the unit really a 43mm that comes with a 37mm mount or something?

Thanks.....

There was an earlier thread in the HV10 forum about this lens and I did not notice any problems. It is 37mm with a 6 adapter rings including 43mm.

I'll let you know how it works, but in the mean time I'll look for the other thread.

Mike

There was an earlier thread in the HV10 forum about this lens and I did not notice any problems. It is 37mm with a 6 adapter rings including 43mm.

I'll let you know how it works, but in the mean time I'll look for the other thread.

Mike

Mike,
The concern is that the HV10 is a has a 37mm threadmount on the lens. That would make the Raynox a perfect fit on the HV10. However, the HV20 is a 43mm mount, right? So I would at least be a llittle concerned on how a 37mm adapter is going to go onto a 43mm mount without serious vignetting. Maybe I am misundertanding something here. I can honestly say I have only ever really had to deal with 72mm threaded adapters and filters up until now, so these smaller sizes are all new to me.

Peace!

Mike,
The concern is that the HV10 is a has a 37mm threadmount on the lens. That would make the Raynox a perfect fit on the HV10. However, the HV20 is a 43mm mount, right? So I would at least be a llittle concerned on how a 37mm adapter is going to go onto a 43mm mount without serious vignetting. Maybe I am misundertanding something here. I can honestly say I have only ever really had to deal with 72mm threaded adapters and filters up until now, so these smaller sizes are all new to me.

Peace!

I'm just trying it, if it don't work it goes.

:)

Mike,

That works for me! Let me konw how it works. I just thought you had already worked this out and could edu-ma-cate me on how it all goes together.

Still....keep us posted.

Peace!

Mike,

That works for me! Let me konw how it works. I just thought you had already worked this out and could edu-ma-cate me on how it all goes together.

Still....keep us posted.

Peace!

Marty,

I'm try to get learned fast and told all. :)

P.S. B&H was out of WD43's.

Mike

I use the Raynox HD5050 Pro with my HV10, works OK, but only OK

It vignettes slightly on the HV10, even with the 37 to 37 mm adapter removed. On the HV10 the lens mount is fairly far from the lens, don't know what the HV20 is like.

Also note that the adapter lens is a bit soft, only slightly in the center and a fair about in the edges. Used with those limitations it works. I try an limit its use to high dynamic scenes when things are going to be blurred anyway. Most HDTV crop a little so the vignetting is normally not visible.

I would be interested in any feedback on the Canon wide adapter.

Rick

You can't put a device thats smaller than the existing lens diameter (except for tele-converters). The HV20 is 43mm so you can't use a step-down ring to 37mm because it will vinette badly (probably 1/2 the picture). You can go the other way and step-up to a larger lens adapter but your best bet is stick with the Canon or something from Century (when they get one out). All these cheap, er, inexpensive asian adapters/converters are not good with the kind of sharpness that a HV20 puts out. If you look at these on a camera with a GOOD production monitor and look towards the corners....well....I think you'll see what I mean.

Jim Martin

Thanks Jim.....that is how I thought it worked.

You can't put a device thats smaller than the existing lens diameter (except for tele-converters). The HV20 is 43mm so you can't use a step-down ring to 37mm because it will vinette badly (probably 1/2 the picture). You can go the other way and step-up to a larger lens adapter but your best bet is stick with the Canon or something from Century (when they get one out).
Jim Martin

Jim, do you think Canon's WD43 will maintain the image quality of the HV20?

Regards,

Pat

OK - After reading thread upon thread on mic's, I realize there is no one "do all" mic, but I think I have narrowed it down to one. I am looking for:

1. Something on camera - "run and gun"
2. A size that will not overwhelm the camera
3. Good indoors
4. Battery powered

I think the ME64/k6 combo fits the bill? It is small, battery powered and is good indoors? I have also considered the Rode videomic, but that seems too big and bulky. If it works out well then I am hoping to add either the Rode NTG-2 or AT897 for outdoors use.

Is this a bad choice?

Rapo

If anyone is looking for a good and cheap replacement for the built in microphone, I can recommend the Audio Technica ATR25. It's a AA battery powered stereo condenser mic, which comes with all cables and camera mounts you need. I've had very good results with all cameras I own and it's definetely far better than the built in mic.

http://www.microphones.com/microphone.cfm?URLID=ATR25

It's obviously not a shotgun mic and therefore doesn't have a very long pickup range. But I think that it's comparable with much higher priced Sony video microphones I dealt with.

You can't put a device thats smaller than the existing lens diameter (except for tele-converters). The HV20 is 43mm so you can't use a step-down ring to 37mm because it will vinette badly (probably 1/2 the picture).

Jim Martin

I will officially verify that the hv20/raynox5050 combo is a no go. Unusable
vignetting. I am sending the raynox back to BH for the canon wide angle.


Jim

How are you guys planning on using these high end mics with your HV20? Does anyone have experience with any of the Beachtek adapters? Would it help to use one with mic pre-amps? Or would passive XLR inputs (w/phantom power) be good enough?
http://www.adorama.com/VDBDXA10.html?searchinfo=beachtek&item_no=8
http://www.adorama.com/VDBDXA2S.html?searchinfo=beachtek&item_no=10
http://www.adorama.com/VDBDXA6.html?searchinfo=beachtek&item_no=5

Any idea how the Raynox 6600 Pro will work with the HV20?

just a thought but would it work if you took the headphone out off of another camera or mixer, and plugged that into the mic jack on the hv20?

i'm looking at getting something like this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=WishList.jsp&A=details&Q=&sku=294571&is=REG

and wonder if it would work using the 1/8 phones jack to the hv20, because something like this would also work nicely with my xl1s setup as well.

or should i look into something like the beachtek stuff:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=WishList.jsp&A=details&Q=&sku=335809&is=REG

also does anyone know if the mic jack is line level or mic level?

has anyone tried using the Canon .7 WA for 58mm filter size ??

It will not vignet -- but its a SD adapter

Unless you're planning to do a 3-monitor editing setup, I'd skip the Blackmagic Intensity and spend more on the mic / sound chain. Or the tripod. Or lights. You can just capture HDV.

Bruce

I have the VCL-HG2037Y 2x's TC for an HC1. I bought a 43 to 37 mm step-down ring and used it to mount the Sony TC to the HV20. I expected vignetting throughout most of the zoom range. In fact, it only vignettes through the widest half of the range. The image quality with this combo is very good with good sharpness corner to corner and only a fairly minor amount of purple fringing on the edges at full zoom. The Sony TC yields better image quality on the HV20 than it does on my HC1, presumably because of the superior image quality of the HV20.

The TC is almost as heavy as the camera, but the fit is good.

Pat

Well my mic choice has grown a bit, but I am still undecided? For indoor use:

Rode NT3
AT897
Rode NTG2
ME64/KP combo

I'd like to have it by this weekend for a family gathering - 80 people at our local city rec center.

ps - I am leaning towards the NTG2 for outdoor use for sure?

Rapo

I would choose the ME66 over the ME64 for indoor use. Reflections off walls are a big problem inside and I think one of the major contributors non professional sound. If you can't put a mike on the subject, at least indoors, use a shotgun.

Rick

Have you even thought about the DM-50 from Canon? Hotshoe mount and three different settings, shotgun-stereo-and wide range stereo? You are about to put a mic on a $1,000 camera, why not consider the mic made for it. Easy to mount and use! Very nicely priced!

If I had good hearing I'd try to do a test for all, but alas I don't. I will use my DM-50 for my shoots.

Mike

I would choose the ME66 over the ME64 for indoor use. Reflections off walls are a big problem inside and I think one of the major contributors non professional sound. If you can't put a mike on the subject, at least indoors, use a shotgun.

Rick

Rick - I thought it was just the opposit? A "shotgun" was not good for indoors, rather a cardioid (hyper/super) mic better suits indoors?

Rapo

Rapo-
In my experience, a shotgun mike is a good choice whenever you are at a distance from the subject, especially if you have other interferring sounds. Indoors this is ususally reflections and other people talking. Outdoors, you probably don't have the reflections, but you have all kinds of other sources- people, birds, traffic etc. The assumption here is that the main subject is at a point, not spread out like a band or a choir.

I like to separately record the background and mix it in post so I can control how it comes out. The background sound, in my case usuallly goes in either the front channels and or the rear surround channels, putting most of the main subject in the center channel. But even if you are just doing stereo, you need to control the level of the background.

Rick

Have you even thought about the DM-50 from Canon? Hotshoe mount and three different settings, shotgun-stereo-and wide range stereo? You are about to put a mic on a $1,000 camera, why not consider the mic made for it. Easy to mount and use! Very nicely priced!

For family stuff, I'm going to try one of these: http://www.azdencorp.com/shop/customer/product.php?productid=93733&cat=2&page=1 Street price is around $70.

For my short film projects, I've already got an AT897, a SGM-1X as well as a wireless lav set up. But I'm trying to figure out which Beachtek adapter to use with the HV20 for good XLR inputs for these mics.

For family stuff, I'm going to try one of these: http://www.azdencorp.com/shop/customer/product.php?productid=93733&cat=2&page=1 Street price is around $70.

For my short film projects, I've already got an AT897, a SGM-1X as well as a wireless lav set up. But I'm trying to figure out which Beachtek adapter to use with the HV20 for good XLR inputs for these mics.

Hi Peter,

No offence, but I'm currious as to why you would quote me and then ignore everything that I said?

The mic you are reffering to mounts on the hotshoe of the camera but does not take advantage of the hotshoe. It is simply shoe mounted. It is powered by a battery and must be plugged in the the camera mic input.

Just for your information.

Mike

Well I went with the RODE NTG-2. I am sure I will enjoey it! Now my next question is how I should carry all the new gear? I have a Lowepro Mini Trekker for my Canon 10D and stuff, and I think it will do fine to carry both the HV20 and 10D, but I also want something small that I can cary only the HV20 and the basic accessories? I'd like to be able to carry the mic, but at nearly 11in long, it might be tough to do, and keep it compact?

Thanks in advance.

Rapo

I met with Century Precision Optics (Schneider) today to examine the possibility of a wide angle adaptor from them for this camera. The Canon WDH43 is out there now but I have always been a fan of Century's adaptors. However, they do not have a stock 43mm HD unit that can be simply adapted to this camera--we tested a 37mm adaptor with a stepup, and it just made it without vignetting but only when the adaptor was centered just so, which would be hard to achieve given that it would have to be a screw-on adaptor. Thus it will be a matter of some months, if ever, before they would have a competitive adaptor to the Canon model (but it would probably be a .65 zoomthrough to the Canon .7x). Incidentally we had a bit better luck with their .55x adaptor which is as little as a screw-on filter--this is a non-zoom through and has noticeable distortion but could be useful for a low-profile point of view cam setup. They are machining me a prototype adaptor ring and I will report back on this. Their 2x adaptor will work with this camera (as vignetting is not an issue as it is with the wide lenses) and should be released first.

I bought the .5X Raynox when the Sony HC3 came out, and was not really very happy with how it worked out. As stated above, the image was a bit soft, had slight vignetting, and also some very noticeable color fringing at the edges of the frame. The web site for Raynox made this adapter seem a lot better than it actually is. I would get a Canon or other name brand adapter for my new HV20 anbd forget the Raynox. I may have to use a .7X since I have not seen a Canon .5X.

Might I also suggest a shoulder and / or wrist strap for the HV20. The case is more than a bit slippery....and another person already reported dropping his HV20 on the forum and sent along a picture of the dented damaged case to prove it.....

Larry

If anyone is looking for a good and cheap replacement for the built in microphone, I can recommend the Audio Technica ATR25. It's a AA battery powered stereo condenser mic, which comes with all cables and camera mounts you need. I've had very good results with all cameras I own and it's definetely far better than the built in mic.

http://www.microphones.com/microphone.cfm?URLID=ATR25

It's obviously not a shotgun mic and therefore doesn't have a very long pickup range. But I think that it's comparable with much higher priced Sony video microphones I dealt with.

In what kinds of environments have you used this in? The reviews I've read are mixed. Some call it great, one VX user said generated too much noise because of the plastic in its construction.

I bought the .5X Raynox when the Sony HC3 came out, and was not really very happy with how it worked out. As stated above, the image was a bit soft, had slight vignetting, and also some very noticeable color fringing at the edges of the frame. The web site for Raynox made this adapter seem a lot better than it actually is. I would get a Canon or other name brand adapter for my new HV20 anbd forget the Raynox. I may have to use a .7X since I have not seen a Canon .5X.

LarryI have a .7 WA Rayvox 43mm lens that I use with my Panasonic AG-DVC30. Would I be correct in assuming that this would fit the HV20?

In what kinds of environments have you used this in? The reviews I've read are mixed. Some call it great, one VX user said generated too much noise because of the plastic in its construction.

I've just compared those recordings from my Panasonic SD camera, with and without the AT25. Even though the camera's built in mic has a clean an high quality sound, it picks up a slight hum/hiss from the camera itself (probably the tape). The footage I recorded with the AT25 sounds at least just as clear, but without the noise.

I used it for my feature film in dialogue scenes (closeup shots), simply putting it on a small table tripod (not the best solution, but worked like a charm). I used it for action shots for picking up a nice noisefree ambient sound and I did some rock concert videos - all of them came out very nice. And I'm a musician, too, so I can be delicate and picky when it comes to sound! ;)

I couldn't make out any particular noise pickup either. It's not internally shielded (handling noise protection), but that's not the kind of mic you would use by hand anyway (even though you can, just handle it with care). And unlike I read in some review, the AT25 is completely made of metal, it may be thin but it's definetely not plastic (both the upper and lower part). It may have some plastic parts inside, but I can't see a problem with that. It's a lightweight mic, but it seems sturdy and both mics I've got are still working after 3 years (one had a slight battery contact problem once, but I could fix it easily by myself).

I have a .7 WA Rayvox 43mm lens that I use with my Panasonic AG-DVC30. Would I be correct in assuming that this would fit the HV20?

Remember, any wide angle adaptor that was designed for an SD camera will not be able to resolve for an HD camera. Hence Canon's introduction of the WD-H43 after the WD-43.

Hi Charles,

do you know this for a fact? Any sources backing that up? I happen to have a WD43 that I intend to use with my (upcoming) HV20. The optical quality of that lens seems very good -- to the naked eye anyway. I wouldnt want to spend another EUR180 just because Canon thought the introduction of the H would mean a nice addition to their revenue...
tnx
Pieter

Remember, any wide angle adaptor that was designed for an SD camera will not be able to resolve for an HD camera. Hence Canon's introduction of the WD-H43 after the WD-43.
Thanks, Charles. What if I shoot the HV20 in SD mode? Would it work then?

I just wanted to add this to the infobase, since I own & recommend the c-8 43 and its big brother c-8 67, two exceptional pieces of glass used in cine 8 land, and easily picked up at the world auction place.



Canon C-8 WIDE ATTACHMENT 43

Special supplementary lens (spectra coating) for the Canon 514XL and 514XL-S movie cameras or any camera with 43mm filter thread for super wide-angle cinematography. When the camera is set to wide-angle macro filming and this lens is used, the focal length is fixed at slightly over 4mm, the shortest focal length in the world for 8mm movie camera. Because of this short focal length, the depth of field is so deep that, in good lighting conditions, there is no need for focus adjustment between the closest filming distance and infinity.


find the manual for the 67 threaded version here (the 43 is identical)
http://www.super8.no/Manuals/Canon_C-8%20wide%20attachment%2067_User%20manual_Multiple%20languages.pdf

ps they are not zoom through

Thanks, Charles. What if I shoot the HV20 in SD mode? Would it work then?

That should be fine...the thing to remember is that the better the image going in regardless of format, the better the result. Even an SD image will improve with the best possible optics.

Pieter, it is known that the H version of that lens has a matched resolution for the HV20 while the earlier version will soften the image when used on that camera. It's not just a renaming of the same piece of glass. I can't give you quantitative numbers nor resolution charts, but that is the word that I have heard through Canon channels. I had the same conversation with the Century Precision folks, who have a 43mm SD wide angle adaptor but said there's no point in even trying it on the camera as it defeats the purpose.

Charles, thanks, that's clear language. Still I think I'm going to be a little bit stubborn and try first :))

Certainly worth trying, as it may be "good enough" depending on what yardstick you use. I've never been one to insist on shooting resolution charts and ripping apart test images--if I like the look of a camera, I use that camera! My recommendation would be to shoot a demanding scene with lots of detail (make sure there is something with fine lines if you don't have a chart) without the adaptor, then with--make sure to set the field of view of both shots to as close as you can so it is a fair comparison. Probably easiest to compare stills taken with the camera as they will represent the highest possible resolution.

If anyone is interested - BH has the WD-H43 in stock. Its part #2072B001. It is on thir site as a WD-43.

Rapo

Just received my WD-H43 from Zotz Digital today (where I also bought my camera). They are one of our site sponsors here, and I thought I'd give them a try. I got great personalized service and the prices are very competitive. Give Brian a call at Zotz for a quote if you are considering buying online.

If anyone is interested - BH has the WD-H43 in stock. Its part #2072B001. It is on thir site as a WD-43.

Rapo


How do you know this is the WD-H43 and not just the regular old WD-43? It looks like it is the stock SD lens and we are all waiting on the HD version.

Peace.

Certainly worth trying, as it may be "good enough" depending on what yardstick you use. I've never been one to insist on shooting resolution charts and ripping apart test images--if I like the look of a camera, I use that camera! My recommendation would be to shoot a demanding scene with lots of detail (make sure there is something with fine lines if you don't have a chart) without the adaptor, then with--make sure to set the field of view of both shots to as close as you can so it is a fair comparison. Probably easiest to compare stills taken with the camera as they will represent the highest possible resolution.

FYI: Some of you may have seen this in another post. Here is a test in which I used the HV20 and convertors on some of the shots, both telephoto, and wide. The wide is a .7 x Kenko on a 58mm mount, I bought to use with my VX2000. As Charles says, you can judge for yourself whether it does well enough. Telephoto is a 58mm mount Sony HG 1.7x I also bought for the VX2000. I have used it on my FX1 too, though I could only use it a full telephoto because of vignetting. At full telephoto, I notices some red fringing on the dark birds.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=XL96FDZ0

How do you know this is the WD-H43 and not just the regular old WD-43? It looks like it is the stock SD lens and we are all waiting on the HD version.

Peace.

Just to reiterate, I have in my hands the WD-H43 from Zotz Digital. They have it in stock.

I had been asked to provide stills of the WD-H43. Here they are. The last one is the "well-dressed HV20" with H43 and DM-50 mike onboard.

The last two are frames from the camera itself showing field of view with and without the adaptor. Clearly there is a bit of barrel distortion as to be expected with a wide angle adaptor (there's even a touch of it on the shot without the adaptor!)

The adaptor is quite heavy compared to the body, it adds up to a bit of a handful (you'll want to use two hands to operate). The center of gravity is pushed up to the somewhere around the manual focus button, i.e. a bit over an inch from the front of the camera!

Can someone also give some advice on a pistol grip for the HV20?