Thanks !
 

Thanks for answering so quickly... I can go along with that...

Have a nice end of day,

Alain

Can you daisy chain Wide angle and anamorphic adapters together?
 

Topic sums it up, but when I get my XM2, I'd love to get the anamorphic adapter and a wide angle and obviously would want to have both of them on at the same time. Can I do this with any of the adapters out there? I looked at Century's site but couldn't find anything about that on there.

Cheers
Aaron

I wouldn't do this---too much glass.

Frank, yeah I was thinking that, but do you know if it's actually possible with these adaptors?

It won't work right. It's bad enough with these 16:9 adaptors on by themselves. From what I've read the Century is the better one. Adam Wilt reviewed both the Century and Optex not too long ago.

It's possible -- sort of
 

I spoke with a sales woman from Century and she said it's possible to mate a wide angle adapter with their anamorphic adapter, but she wasn't willing to vouch for the results. She said their pro dv series lens VS-06wa75 can clamp on to the front of the anamorphic adapter. I'd love to hear from someone who has tried this, as the inability to use a wide angle lens is the main reason I'm holding off on bying a 16:9 adapter.

One thing to remember though is that an anamorphic will give you a wider field of view anyway.

Yeah, but from what I hear, it isn't near enough. I don't know why all these camcorders seem to be biased towards the telephoto end. Maybe they figure consumers like the gee whiz sensation of being able to zoom way in. While we're at it, when is a company going to a make a series of 16:9 adapters in a variety of focal lengths?

16:9 adapters review
 

Hey Frank, where is that review of Adam WIlt's?
I was interested in shooting with a 16:9 adapter. You don't sound terribly impressed with the adapters. I have never used one. What's up?
Maybe this post belongs in the general DV area...

Nothing's up. It's just that they don't work as good as a cam that can shoot at 16:9 (without cropping). That's from what I've read. Like you, I've never used one. Those 2 review articles were published in DV Magazine. Adam also rated them. (www.dv.com)

There might also be info about these at:
www.adamwilt.com

Try here too for 16:9 adaptor info:
www.geocities.com/hollywood/location/5272

wide angle
 

I saw a GL1 today with a wide angle lens adaptor called Cadivision or Cadvision. Does anyone know more about this lens adaptor?

Are you sure it wasn't Cavision, Frank?

That's it, Cavision. Thanks. It looked more like a fisheye. Is Cavision a brand, or the type of adaptor?

Cavision is a lens accessory manufacturer, Frank... check 'em out at http://www.cavision.com/ -- their glass comes from China; the company is in Canada. Hope this helps,

Chris,

With respect to all the lenses on Ebay, is there anything to watch out for? (other than the seller) Seems like most sub $100 lenses are Japanese. Is this good or bad or no issue. Is there generally more distortion is lower priced lenses?

Thanks,

Tom

BTW, got my bus. degree from SWTSU back in '87. Great town.

XM2 wide angle converters
 

Hi everybody.

Is any input of Century Optics DS-65CV-GL vs. Canon WD-58H.

Please have a look at:
http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/1/1.htm

Any info should be appreciate.

Ignacio

Hi.
Ignacio again.

Sorry to all forum readers. The post was already done with the "search" option: Century Optics

WD-58H Wide Angle images?
 

Just curious if anyone knows of a website or other resource that shows a side-by-side image comparison of a GL-2 image with and without the WD-58H Wide Angle adapter. I'm curious to see the effect of the adapter and see visually how much wider it makes the image.

I'd appreciate any guidance.

:)
NA

The closest I know is the Century Precision Optical site. They show their .65 wide angle adapter here http://www.centuryoptics.com/product..._wac/index.htm It is 5% wider, but I think it will give you a good idea how much wider the WD-58H (.70 wide angle adapter) is than the standard lens.

Jeff

I ordered one a short while ago and I expect it in the mail any time now. Once I get it, I will post a side by side from my GL-2 on my site for you to see.

I think this will do it, though the shots were made with a vx-2000:
http://www.raynox.co.jp/comparison/v...de.htm#xl-7000

I'm already waiting for the WD-58 for 3 weeks now here in Germany.

That Raynox is one of those low-cost fisheye type lenses, where the distortion is intentional. The Canon wide angle is just a straight wide angle. No funky distortion is intended for it, so I'm sure it's image will widely (no pun intended) differ from that of the Raynox...

Century makes also a 0.7x wide angle converter for the XL1s, which has nearly the same focal length wide-end as the XM2. So, take a look here: http://www.centuryoptics.com/product..._wac/index.htm I think it will change like this.

<<<-- Originally posted by Mark Härtl : I think this will do it, though the shots were made with a vx-2000:
http://www.raynox.co.jp/comparison/v...de.htm#xl-7000

I'm already waiting for the WD-58 for 3 weeks now here in Germany. -->>>

Hi, what is the price for a WD58H in Germany, i was thinking of buying one.

greetzzz Erwin Kolman

Hi Erwin,

I ordered it for 220 € at my local dealer. But the price range is only +- 5 €.

BTW: Did you bought your Sabah Oceanic batteries?

<<<-- Originally posted by Mark Härtl : Hi Erwin,

I ordered it for 220 € at my local dealer. But the price range is only +- 5 €.

BTW: Did you bought your Sabah Oceanic batteries? -->>>

Not yet, i`ll wait 2 weeks (low on money)

Erwin

Thank you
 

Thanks everyone! The suggested sites were very helpful and gave me a good idea of what to expect from that lense.

Thanks for the help...

:)

GL2 with WD-58H pictures
 

When I received my GL2, I quickly took few still pictures to verify the wide-angle.

The picture below (about 60Kb) shows the same scene side by side with zoom at 0 and 20X

http://www.natzo.com/GL2-WD58H.jpg


Dany

PS: Sorry for the complete lack of interest or composition of the above picture...

What the hell is this red thing, Dany? :)

Welp, I finally got my WD=58H yesterday and I came back to post my sample pics, but looks like Dany already did the same. It seems like a great lens!

Worth a buy.

The red thing is just a sponge.. nothing alive !

Imran, I'ld still love to see your comparison with/without pics of the WD-58H.

Unfortuneatly the barrel distortion at 0x zoom seems quite noticable.

Does anyone know if you can attach a WC-DC58 to the GL2?
If so, to what affect compared to the WD-58H?


ta,
Happy 2003

The WC-DC58 would fit, as it is a 58mm thread also. It offers the same 0.7X magnification. If you already have for a Canon digital still camera you might just go ahead and try it. It should give the same results. I don't know if the cost of the two adapter are the same, so that might be a consideration. The other factor is the thickness. If the WC-DC58 is longer, it might cause the lens to vignette at the widest settings.

Jeff

Well, my results pretty much matched Dany's. I had taken a similar picture, and it would just be more of the same... Yep, there is distortion. Not ideal, but it still is a nice, clear lens.

Imran.

Could someone post a pic or comment on using the WD-58H with 16:9 recording mode on.

Thanks.

DV blur at distance & wide angle lense impact
 

Presently, I do not have a wide angle adaptor for my GL2, but I am entertaining the possibility of obtaining one (most likely the Canon 0.7X).

This is my question: does a wide angle adaptor have any influence in the sharpness of the GL2's wide angle footage. As noted in other threads, the picture sharpness on the GL2 can suffer from a lack of sharpness in the wider shots. Does this (or any) wide angle adaptor increase/decrease the sharpness of the footage if the framing of the shot was matched; by matched I mean that a zoom was applied to the adaptor to create the same frame as taken without the adaptor.

In addition to the Canon model, I am also curious as to the clarity/picture that might come from a Century 16:9 adaptor. My wife tells me she feels cheated by the lack of a full picture, but that never stopped me from doing what I wanted to do. If you have any input on this subject (the adaptor not the marriage), I would be interested as well.

As always, I am grateful for your assistance.

Hi Brad,
Well, since nobody's chimed-in here I'll take a swing.

Many folks would say that cameras with chips smaller than 2/3rds inch are generally poor for wide-angle shots, and the wider the shot the worse it gets. To some degree I agree.

Nevertheless, that's what we have to work with, eh? I frequently use the WD58 adapter with my GL2 and have not noticed degradation. In fact I think it's probably the best accessory investment you can make, aside from a good mic.

WD58H Here!
 

I've used this Canon accessory in some really tight places. Couldn't have done it without it.

Degradation? I'm not techie enough, but I do come from a background of 3 opticians in the family and my Optics courses in school did tell me that the more "glass" you put in front of a camera or an eye come to that, will "absorb" to some extent the light coming through it.

That being said, I'm fussy about what I see on the final product I do. If you've got a chance to do a Look 'n Feel - Try before you buy, see if you can convince your local cammy shoppe to allow you to do an in-house test - yeah?

I will say that the WD58H does make the XM2 a little front heavy. This is my only criticism.

OOppss!!
 

Sorry Brad - I just re-read your wide-angle adaptor post. Is this the WD58? Sorry for being a bit dense on this!

If you add a wide-angle converter and zoom up to match the camcorder's zoom lens at it's widest angle, you should have *exactly* the same shot. Easy to verify, and all tests I do with wide-angle converters have this as one of the parameters. Stills taken to memory can then be opened in Photoshop for detailed examination.

Of course adding three more elements in front of your 20x zoom's 12 elements won't go un-noticed, but a good widie should be almost transparent to this test. Of course there are losses in that flare is increased, there's a small light loss and de-centering of elements can cause slight sharpness losses. A perfect converter won't degrade the image at all, but we're far from perfect.

tom.