Wide Angle Lens Converter for GL / XM

Bud Kuenzli · July 7th, 2003, 08:52 AM

from my research I learned that the less expensive options have a lot of image quality issues. You can get cheaper lenses but owners of GL2s prob won't be interested.The more expensive century optics lenses are quite good from what I've read but the consensus in my research essentially said the canon was the sweet spot in terms of price/quality. I have one on order myself.

Brendan Getchel · July 7th, 2003, 12:24 PM

Here are my findings. I tested both the $400 Century Optics .65x and Canon WD-58H wide angle adapters side-by-side.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...ighlight=wd58h

Bob Benkosky · July 7th, 2003, 01:10 PM

Yea, I've seen that thread before before he revised it. I guess it's pretty much the Canon's or nothing I assume. I've seen a Kenko ProWide .65x which is said to be pretty good but it's almost as much as the Canon's lens.

I'm in the buying accessories mode right now. I've gotten the Glidacam 2000 Pro, 5 DV tape, a filter kit, and I ordered a tripod. It starts adding up and I don't even have a light.

I was thinking about getting the VL-10i video light because it doesn't require Canon's GL2's power source so I could move it around if I needed to.

I also don't have a carrying case/hard case. Oh woo is me.
It's a great camera but without accessories it's just that a camera.

Allen Brodsky · July 7th, 2003, 03:56 PM

Brendan,
This question is somewhat OT, but do you have any data/opinions on whether the Canon WA has a better image than the Century on a Sony VX-2000? In other words, would your tests apply to the Sony as well?
Thanks.
-- Allen

Brendan Getchel · July 7th, 2003, 09:03 PM

Yes, the adapters perform identically on the Sony (they are the same adapters). Also, the Canon WD-58 performs noticeably better than the more-expensive Sony 0.7x W/A adapter as well. I have the Sony adapter with the VX2000, but no longer use it because the Canon is superior.

Marc Martin · July 7th, 2003, 10:04 PM

I have read that the Optex anamorphic lens is better than the Century. Is it the same for the Wide angle?

It will be interesting to compare the WD-58 to the Optex to see if one is better than the other. Anyone has done this test?

Gints Klimanis · July 8th, 2003, 02:17 AM

Brendan,

My Raynox 0.66 wide angle is fully zoom through, so I'm thinking about other WA lenses. I can't distinguish the Canon WD-58 from the WD-58H. Which of these two fit on a VX-2000 ?
Are they fully zoom through ? Thank you .

http://www.promax.com/Products/Detail/16148

http://www.digitalfotoclub.com/products2/Canon_Canon_WD-58_0_7x_Wide_Angle_f_GL1_3107a002.html

Dirk Goris · July 8th, 2003, 06:55 AM

Hi Brendan,

Thanks for the info. I would like to see those screen shots!

Cheers,

Dirk

Brendan Getchel · July 8th, 2003, 09:07 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Gints Klimanis : My Raynox 0.66 wide angle is fully zoom through, so I'm thinking about other WA lenses. I can't distinguish the Canon WD-58 from the WD-58H. Which of these two fit on a VX-2000 ?

They are the same adapter. The "H" comes with the hood (which I believe is the only way they sell it now).

Both fit the 58mm screw mount of the GL2 and VX2000 and should perform much better then the Raynox.

Tom Hardwick · July 10th, 2003, 12:39 PM

Interesting that Brendan thinks the OIS is seriously degraded when using a zoom through wide-angle converter. If any of you other folk think so, try this. Fit your wide-angle converter and zoom to telephoto. Handholding the combo as still as you can, toggle between OIS on and off and see if you agree with him. I don't.

Oh, maybe at the wide end it doesn't work as well as the camera on its own, but why buy a zoom through then? OK, switch off the OIS if you've bought a non zoom through w/angle, but for all other occasions leave OIS turned on. It's an amazingly transparent technology that closes in on magic.

tom.

Graham Bernard · July 10th, 2003, 12:53 PM

"I can't distinguish the Canon WD-58 from the WD-58H. "

D'yer know why? - there isn't - you're correct. The "H" is the model that "includes" the Sun Hood - simple as that!

Cheers,

Grazie

Andre De Clercq · July 10th, 2003, 01:19 PM

Tom, I agree with you. There is not a single reason why OIS would degrade if a WA is used. OIS is a angular camera motion correction system which is not influenced by a WA adapter lens.

Brendan Getchel · July 10th, 2003, 03:31 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Andre De Clercq : Tom, I agree with you. There is not a single reason why OIS would degrade if a WA is used. OIS is a angular camera motion correction system which is not influenced by a WA adapter lens. -->>>

I'm sorry, but OIS is degraded when any adapter is added to the front -- in my experience. There is actually a very simple, viable explanation for it, but I have since forgotten it.

Try it for yourself. Both the W/A and TC adapters degrade IS effectiveness.

Andre De Clercq · July 10th, 2003, 04:09 PM

Brendan, can you explain what kind of degradation you did experience. Do you see other effects than motion stabilisation when OIS is on? On the effectiveness point, you should know that OIS is based on angular motion detection based on gyro sensors. The compensation degree is never 100% for the whole motion (shake) frequency spectrum, so you'll allways get some remaining motion effects or not fully compensated angles of motion. The remaining uncompensated angular components translate into image shifts which are lens focal length dependent. So tele will allways result in more shake residues than wide. WA adapters are just (together with the standard lens) optical systems with short overall focal length and don't change this compensation behavier.
B.t.w. I have VX2000 and WD-58. I never expirienced negative effects...

Don Palomaki · July 10th, 2003, 05:17 PM

The adapter may change the calibration factors for the VAP action vs. sensed motion making it less effective.

July 7th, 2003, 08:52 AM	#166
Bud Kuenzli Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: North Pole, Alaska Posts: 197	from what I've gleaned from my research I learned that the less expensive options have a lot of image quality issues. You can get cheaper lenses but owners of GL2s prob won't be interested.The more expensive century optics lenses are quite good from what I've read but the consensus in my research essentially said the canon was the sweet spot in terms of price/quality. I have one on order myself. __________________ on the Internet, when you get where you're going you still don't know where you are

July 7th, 2003, 12:24 PM	#167
Brendan Getchel Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Waterbury, CT Posts: 101	Here are my findings. I tested both the $400 Century Optics .65x and Canon WD-58H wide angle adapters side-by-side. http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...ighlight=wd58h __________________ Dumb Guy.

July 7th, 2003, 01:10 PM	#168
Bob Benkosky Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Lake Park, Florida Posts: 202	Yea, I've seen that thread before before he revised it. I guess it's pretty much the Canon's or nothing I assume. I've seen a Kenko ProWide .65x which is said to be pretty good but it's almost as much as the Canon's lens. I'm in the buying accessories mode right now. I've gotten the Glidacam 2000 Pro, 5 DV tape, a filter kit, and I ordered a tripod. It starts adding up and I don't even have a light. I was thinking about getting the VL-10i video light because it doesn't require Canon's GL2's power source so I could move it around if I needed to. I also don't have a carrying case/hard case. Oh woo is me. It's a great camera but without accessories it's just that a camera. __________________ http://www.veoh.com/channels/filmmaker My clips and films.

July 7th, 2003, 03:56 PM	#169
Allen Brodsky Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Eatontown, NJ Posts: 118	Canon WA better on Sony, too? Brendan, This question is somewhat OT, but do you have any data/opinions on whether the Canon WA has a better image than the Century on a Sony VX-2000? In other words, would your tests apply to the Sony as well? Thanks. -- Allen

July 7th, 2003, 09:03 PM	#170
Brendan Getchel Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Waterbury, CT Posts: 101	Yes, the adapters perform identically on the Sony (they are the same adapters). Also, the Canon WD-58 performs noticeably better than the more-expensive Sony 0.7x W/A adapter as well. I have the Sony adapter with the VX2000, but no longer use it because the Canon is superior. __________________ Dumb Guy.

July 7th, 2003, 10:04 PM	#171
Marc Martin Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Paris, France Posts: 80	I have read that the Optex anamorphic lens is better than the Century. Is it the same for the Wide angle? It will be interesting to compare the WD-58 to the Optex to see if one is better than the other. Anyone has done this test?

July 8th, 2003, 02:17 AM	#172
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	Brendan, My Raynox 0.66 wide angle is fully zoom through, so I'm thinking about other WA lenses. I can't distinguish the Canon WD-58 from the WD-58H. Which of these two fit on a VX-2000 ? Are they fully zoom through ? Thank you . http://www.promax.com/Products/Detail/16148 http://www.digitalfotoclub.com/products2/Canon_Canon_WD-58_0_7x_Wide_Angle_f_GL1_3107a002.html

July 8th, 2003, 06:55 AM	#173
Dirk Goris Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 66	Hi Brendan, Thanks for the info. I would like to see those screen shots! Cheers, Dirk

July 8th, 2003, 09:07 AM	#174
Brendan Getchel Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Waterbury, CT Posts: 101	<<<-- Originally posted by Gints Klimanis : My Raynox 0.66 wide angle is fully zoom through, so I'm thinking about other WA lenses. I can't distinguish the Canon WD-58 from the WD-58H. Which of these two fit on a VX-2000 ? They are the same adapter. The "H" comes with the hood (which I believe is the only way they sell it now). Both fit the 58mm screw mount of the GL2 and VX2000 and should perform much better then the Raynox. __________________ Dumb Guy.

July 10th, 2003, 12:39 PM	#175
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Interesting that Brendan thinks the OIS is seriously degraded when using a zoom through wide-angle converter. If any of you other folk think so, try this. Fit your wide-angle converter and zoom to telephoto. Handholding the combo as still as you can, toggle between OIS on and off and see if you agree with him. I don't. Oh, maybe at the wide end it doesn't work as well as the camera on its own, but why buy a zoom through then? OK, switch off the OIS if you've bought a non zoom through w/angle, but for all other occasions leave OIS turned on. It's an amazingly transparent technology that closes in on magic. tom.

July 10th, 2003, 12:53 PM	#176
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	H stands for Hood . . . "I can't distinguish the Canon WD-58 from the WD-58H. " D'yer know why? - there isn't - you're correct. The "H" is the model that "includes" the Sun Hood - simple as that! Cheers, Grazie

July 10th, 2003, 01:19 PM	#177
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Tom, I agree with you. There is not a single reason why OIS would degrade if a WA is used. OIS is a angular camera motion correction system which is not influenced by a WA adapter lens.

July 10th, 2003, 03:31 PM	#178
Brendan Getchel Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Waterbury, CT Posts: 101	<<<-- Originally posted by Andre De Clercq : Tom, I agree with you. There is not a single reason why OIS would degrade if a WA is used. OIS is a angular camera motion correction system which is not influenced by a WA adapter lens. -->>> I'm sorry, but OIS is degraded when any adapter is added to the front -- in my experience. There is actually a very simple, viable explanation for it, but I have since forgotten it. Try it for yourself. Both the W/A and TC adapters degrade IS effectiveness. __________________ Dumb Guy.

July 10th, 2003, 04:09 PM	#179
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Brendan, can you explain what kind of degradation you did experience. Do you see other effects than motion stabilisation when OIS is on? On the effectiveness point, you should know that OIS is based on angular motion detection based on gyro sensors. The compensation degree is never 100% for the whole motion (shake) frequency spectrum, so you'll allways get some remaining motion effects or not fully compensated angles of motion. The remaining uncompensated angular components translate into image shifts which are lens focal length dependent. So tele will allways result in more shake residues than wide. WA adapters are just (together with the standard lens) optical systems with short overall focal length and don't change this compensation behavier. B.t.w. I have VX2000 and WD-58. I never expirienced negative effects...

July 10th, 2003, 05:17 PM	#180
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	The adapter may change the calibration factors for the VAP action vs. sensed motion making it less effective. __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com