If I'm using the wide angle lense and cropping the image (with black bars) in post, then is this my closest approximation of widescreen?

Also, do I go with a standard

Why ?
 

Why would you use a wide angle lens and then crop the ALREADY wide image ?!

Wide angle lens which you paid so much for gives you widescreen image - just use the correct setting in NLE - that`s 16:9 mode - otherwise image will look elongated.

Ok, so I choose to go with a 16:9 project using the wide angle lense. Now, when I export to DVD, will it be in true wide screen?

Yes, but it'll be widescreen whether you use the wide-angle lens. The two have nothing to do with each other anymore.

Anamorphic.
 

Adam, yes, it will be a widescreen DVD if you encode it as "Anamorphic DVD" it`s the best kind of widescreen - where you don`t lose any resolution. Enjoy.

So, next question, HOW DO I ENCODE A DVD AS ANAMORPHIC?


Thanks for putting up with my ignorance, this is the last question, I promise.

Well...
 

I forgot, most (if not all) encoders don`t have "anamorphic" setting so you just encode it with whatever setting you want and that`s it. Then it depends on DVD player to interpret it as anamorphic.

Just ask if you don`t know something, I doubt anyone finds this bothering !

The encoding software must support anamoprhic widescreen for the DVD to display properly. If the software does not support the anamorphic flag (that's all it is, a simple flag in the VTS), then you can only use 4x3 letterboxed, which you specify in your video editing software. Encoders that do support 16x9 are Adobe Encore, Maestro, Sonic DVDIt Pro, etc.

wide angle choices
 

I'm looking into buying a wide angle adaptor for my GL2 and plan to go with a bayonet mount Century Optics lens. I just have a few questions to ask before I decide which lens to go with (.55x or .65x)

Is the zoom through ability of the .65x really necessary? It seems as though I'll keep the camera zoomed all the way out in order to take advantage of the wide angle most of the time anyway.

How do the two lenses compare with regards to barrel distortion?

Does the stock GL2 lens hood work with the .55x? If so, that would be substantially less than the .65x with wide angle hood.

Right now, I'm leaning toward the .55x due to its cost and size, but still think the .65x sounds good too. Any advice will be appreciated.

Nicholi,
We have many existing posts and opinions on wide-angle adapters for the GL1/GL2. Here's one good thread as an example.

Run a Search on "wide AND angle" in this forum to see many others.

Yeah, I searched quite a bit before posting and found a lot on wide angle lenses. Most compare Canon's WD-58 to Century's .65x zoom through, but very very few even mention Century's .55x, and only one post actually comments on its quality/characteristics. I was just hoping someone had a direct comparison between the .65x and the .55x adaptors.

I have the century .55x wide angle and love it. It has a bit more barrel distortion than the canon one but is also wider. The image quality is awesome. I've used both lenses and would take the century over the canon anyday. You can't zoom through it, but that would be pointless since a wide angle is meant for wide shots. And for the price you can't go wrong. You can also fit 72mm slim filters on it as well. You can't fit the canon lense hood on it either but i haven't really had any problems with lense flares anyway.

corey

Thanks Corey, very helpful.
I've kept up with the videos you've posted on your website. Are there any that used the .55x?

Well...
 

I don`t know how Canon`s WD58H compares to others, but I have it for quite some time now and I`m extremely satisfied with it. Barrel distorsion is (at least to my eye) hardly noticable, you would see it only if you`re looking for it :)

century
 

ive got a century optics wide angle/ reversible to fisheye.]
pretty cool. as i recall it was only $200-250 or so from b+h.
its been awhile, though. i think the model was WA-58 maybe /GL?