|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 22nd, 2007, 10:27 AM | #91 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Carol Stream, IL
Posts: 541
|
Quote:
http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/450020233/5.jpg http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/450020233/6.jpg The brand name on the hood is "Tamron" It's not perfect and it doesn't answer the filter issue. I had to cut it down to avoid vignetting....but it's better than nothing. Bob T.
__________________
Bob T. |
|
December 22nd, 2007, 10:31 AM | #92 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Carol Stream, IL
Posts: 541
|
Quote:
Ed Troxel put one up at his site...it's near the end of this thread: http://www.jetdv.com/vegas/forum/viewtopic.php?t=984 Bob T.
__________________
Bob T. |
|
December 23rd, 2007, 12:47 PM | #93 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Mt Laurel, NJ
Posts: 43
|
|
December 23rd, 2007, 01:47 PM | #94 |
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 613
|
Your zoom is cut down quite a bit, a tradeoff for native 16:9. But it's not eliminated. I would say that you would want to zoom in only about halfway, otherwise you'll have a lot of "fun" trying to find your focus. If you're doing some sort of documentary or nature stuff, then the 16:9 adapter may not be for you unless you can refrain from zooming or are willing to go back and forth from the digital 16:9 mode when you need zooming and back to the adapter when you don't. Don't do both digital 16:9 and the adapter unless you're wanting to go for a 2.35:1 aspect ratio look.
__________________
"Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew www.BabsDoProductions.com |
December 23rd, 2007, 08:18 PM | #95 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West Rosemary Beach, Florida
Posts: 199
|
Thanks Sunny and you too, Jack. My two lens are supposed to arrive tomorrow. Now I know what to expect.
I need a small amount of zoom for a stage performance long shot, but none for the dolly shots up close. |
December 24th, 2007, 06:18 AM | #96 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 75
|
I got my package. Here is two quick pictures of the Sunshade. It looks very nice.
http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/2033/img2088tc6.jpg http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/7379/img2089cl0.jpg |
December 24th, 2007, 06:36 AM | #97 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West Rosemary Beach, Florida
Posts: 199
|
Wow, that is one good looking sunshade. Thanks for pics, Chris.
I think you made a good choice. Funny, I never thought I'd pay the same price for a lens that I'd pay for the sunshade..... decisions, decisions........ |
December 24th, 2007, 02:43 PM | #98 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Mt Laurel, NJ
Posts: 43
|
Chris, thanks for sharing those pictures. When you get a chance, can you take a picture of the sunshade mounted to the lens/GL2? Thanks in advance!
|
December 30th, 2007, 03:28 PM | #99 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Mt Laurel, NJ
Posts: 43
|
Quote:
I'm just an amateur videographer and I'm new to the world of buying accessories for my GL2. I'm just really surprised that should I decide to purchase the necessary accessories for my 16:9 adapter (ie sunshade, filters), the total cost will be a significant percentage of what I originally paid for the GL2. Maybe I should pick up a less costly hobby! |
|
December 30th, 2007, 04:13 PM | #100 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 3,048
|
Sunny,
I do not think this is a Hobby!!! It is more like a disease!!! I am convinced when you look at the entire kit, the camera is one of the cheaper expenses. A good tripod will cost as much a a camera. I hate to even start adding it up!!!
__________________
DATS ALL FOLKS Dale W. Guthormsen |
December 31st, 2007, 09:31 AM | #101 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, MI USA
Posts: 96
|
Cheap sunshade
Hello Sunny,
I'm a budget-minded consumer myself. I decide very carefully what I spend most of my money on, and what I bargain price shop for. Take a look at Cokin video filters, they have an adaptor ring (model P-499) that fits the 16:9 adaptor (although the screws that come with the ring are way to long, so I replaced them) With the adaptor ring I can attach my Cokin "P" series filter holder that I use with my digital SLR camera. The filter holder has it's own sunshade that only cost about $10.00. The adaptor was $30.00 and the filter holder is around $25.00. It may not look professional, but it gets the job done. Maybe after a few years I'll upgrade my setup, but I have my money set on other sights. |
December 31st, 2007, 10:37 AM | #102 | |
Sponsor: Schneider Optics
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Van Nuys, CA
Posts: 387
|
Quote:
Sunny, You made the point exactly in your comment. A $100 sunshade filter holder is the least expensive I've seen that does both. We manufacture mostly sunshade filter holders because most people want to be able to filter thier lens and it is less expensive than buying a matte box (unless you want to use a polarizer). Ryan Avery Schneider Optics |
|
December 31st, 2007, 05:50 PM | #103 |
Sponsor: Schneider Optics
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Van Nuys, CA
Posts: 387
|
We just found one more 16:9 GL adapter during year end inventory that we are selling for $99.00. I would imagine that this will last a very limited time as well. Order through the website or give us a call if you want it.
Ryan Avery Schneider Optics |
December 31st, 2007, 07:20 PM | #104 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rohnert Park, Ca.
Posts: 99
|
Ryan, thanks for letting us know.
Sold !! |
January 15th, 2008, 09:26 AM | #105 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Carol Stream, IL
Posts: 541
|
Quote:
And I want to thank Chris van der Zaan for posting that link to the $99 sun shade and filter holder. Mine arrived yesterday and it's very nice....And it fits my wide angle lens also! Now I just need to get some filters for it. Bob T.
__________________
Bob T. |
|
| ||||||
|
|