HV20 LCD underscan/actual picture
 

Went on vacation with the HV20 and a new wide angle adapter. Shot 8 hours of footage. Looked great on the LCD. Got home and started logging the tapes and was horrified to see that on the full screen display, the wide angle adapter is fully visible in every corner! ANd I mean A LOT! Maybe 10% of the screen in each corner.

Is the underscan on the LCD that big, or are there different "modes" for the LCD that might have shown me the full screen?


I guess my only option is to crop the entire picture down by 20% to hide the vignetting (although it looks way worse than standard vignetting).

Is this the Canon WDH-43?

If it were that lens, I would think there might be some logic to get the slightly cheaper Canon WDH-46....and use a step up ring?

You will not have the black corners with the WDH-43. I have it and it was the only one that didn't had the corners. All the smaller lenses will have it. I think there is a Raynox which will fit but I have not tried it after three wrong lenses. I stuck with the original manufacturer part :-)

Regards

Axel

Nope, aftermarket adapter. Cokin I believe.

Dylan Use a 235 Widescreen aperature ?! :)

Did same thing with a rubber lens hood, and also done that with my FX1 with a 58 mm adapter.

Sorry to hear about that - I know what you mean. I wouldn't blame the HV20 - it's a consumer camera that most will be using to display their videos on LCD TVs with corresponding overscans. Since this relates to most of us (aside from video posted to the net) it makes sense. So, if you're making it for Plasma/LCD TV, most have overscan too, so it might not be an issue. All depends.

I own the Canon WDH-43 and it's 'perfect' - no vignetting. I also own a cheaper, older Sony wide angle and it vignettes as poorly as Dylan's. The upside is, on a vacation, it'd be better to have a cheaper lens get damaged during use than the Canon WDH-43.

The XL1, XL2 and XHA1 all show overscan as well, so you occasionally see boom mics and whatnot when you get to the post phase. Just part of the deal, I guess.

I don't blame the HV20... I blame the operator (err... me) for not checking it against a real monitor first... :)

Chris...

That's a really good idea, I'll give it a test, thanks!

Apologies Dylan, not trying to blame you - I fell for the HV20's overscan antics (see where I'm placing the blame?) too with that Sony wideangle I have :)

I've shot over 100 hours with my HV20 and I never ever noticed that everything wasn't wysiwyg. Now I know why it was a good idea to spend the extra bucks for my WDH-43. Thanks for this information. I wonder if the same holds true if you use the eyepiece viewer which no one ever uses, I guess?

If my Sony HC1 is anything to go by then yes, the EP viewfinder shows a different (more complete) view.

No worries. :)

Actually, I only get the vignetting with my .6 Cokin. I also have a cheapo .45 as well that doesn't vignette at all.

Come to think of it, to be fair to the Cokin adapter (great adapter, very sharp!) it only does so because I had to use a step-up ring for it as I purchased it for a previous camcorder. Next time I use it, I'm going to gaff tape it right to the body.

It's the same with my Sony - and I'm using more than a single step-up ring! The tape should work - will work - I did that with this same lens to an older Canon ZR20 that I owned way back when - the ZR20 still works I should add!

I took a chance on one of those "el cheapo" .45's, Digital Concepts. Amazingly sharp and doesn't vignette but due to the overscan a small bit of the Cinetactics Matteblox showed.

I was able to crop that out in post, tho.

As a fellow HC1 owner, I'll remember this post. As a potential HV30 owner, I'll subscribe to this thread. Some good information on here.