Wide angle lens adapter

[Mike Phan]

I just wanted to know anyone has a canon xl2 with the 20x and using a wide angle adapter? How does it work, and is it the cheaper alternative instead of buying the 3x wide angle lens? I am on a budget and the 3x is not something i can afford right now. Thanks everyone.

[Declan Smith]

I have the redeye adapter. Does a good job generally , but a little soft and suffers from barrel distortion in the overscan area (i.e. when viewed on a PC). Fine on a TV though. I since got the 3x lens, which is of course far superior (and far more expensive, unless you get one from ebay). With the redeye on the 3x lens you can get some ridiculously wide shots!!

[Richard Hunter]

Hi Mike. I'm using the Century Optics 0.7X adaptor. It's a bit heavy on the front of the camera but you do get used to it. I like it because it still allows me to have a 20X zoom range, only wider.

Richard

[Eric Elliott]

Heya Mike,
I'm using the Century Optics 0.6X adaptor because I'm a cheap bastard. It doesn't have zoom-through but since I'm only using it for the widest shots I need, I'm not bothered by that too much. Not much distortion but like the .7x adapter it does add some weight to the front of an already front-heavy camera.

It's damn cheap, though.

[Andy Joyce]

Yeah, the 0.6x is perfect for the money. The "wide-ness" is better than the 0.7x and most people shoot wide and stay wide, so I don't mind that I only get 50% zoom-through before losing focus.

Plus, I'm a cheap bastard too.

[Marty Hudzik]

Originally Posted by Eric Elliott

Heya Mike,
I'm using the Century Optics 0.6X adaptor because I'm a cheap bastard. It doesn't have zoom-through but since I'm only using it for the widest shots I need, I'm not bothered by that too much. Not much distortion but like the .7x adapter it does add some weight to the front of an already front-heavy camera.

It's damn cheap, though.

If you have never used both .6x and .7x there is a significant difference in weight. The .7x feels like a bowling ball compared to the .6x feeling like a feather in comparison. That is not necessarily a bad thing as the added weght can really help to stabilize your shots. But it can be a real pain in the neck and back on a long day of shooting.

[Jean-Philippe Archibald]

Hi, I rarely need to go wider than the stock lens or the 14X lens with my XL2, but for when these situations comes to me, I would like to have an adequate wide angle converter on hand.

I was looking for this device: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=445219&is=REG

Impact 0.7X wide angle converter. It seems to be interesting since it is 72mm threaded, instead of bayonet mounted. I suppose that I could use it on both the 20X and the 14X lens.

I am not looking for the best solution (if it was the case I would buy the 3x lens) , what I want is an adequate converter, versatile and usable, and not too expensive, for occasionnal use. Do you think this converter would do the trick?

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

The best solution I've found is to use the .7X SD DV Aspheric version Red Eye Wide Angle adapter in 72mm size. It provides very good resolution with no vignetting and only a minimum of distortion. I'm sure you'll be happy with the results. Here is a link to more information:

http://www.collinscraft.com/


For even better resolution, especially if you also want to use it on the XL-H1, go for the new HDV version Red Eye FX.

The great advantage with the Red Eye Wide Angle converters are that they are small, very lightweight, and can be used with the regular 14X, 16X and 20X lens hoods. Another advantage is that the back-focus adjuster on the 14X and 16X manual lenses can still be used with a Red Eye attached. When the 20X lens is used the autofocus automatically adjusts the focus setting of the Red Eye lens.

The Red Eye is not a zoom-through, but I've not found this to be any problem as I always film with the main lens set to its widest setting when I'm using the Red Eye, and the whole point is to provide a wider view than the normal 20X lens.

I'm not sure if you have the Optex Fujinon 14X (which I have) or the Canon 14X lens, but the Red Eye will fit both OK (use a 72-62mm step down adapter for the 62mm Fujinon). The Red Eye also provided superb preformance on my Cannon 16X Manual Servo lens.

[Jean-Philippe Archibald]

Hi Tony, thanks for the reply.

Yes, I am aware of the red eye, and it is in the contenders. This filter sized adapter is pretty amazing. But what I dislike about it is the fact that it cost more (380 instead of 299$) and that it is not zoom-through.

In fictionnal work, this is not a preblem, but I often shoot documentary style, when changing the angle of view rapidly without the need to unscrew anything is a necessity.

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

I haven't tested it, but I somehow doubt that the much cheaper Impact wide-angle lens converter would offer the same performance as the Red Eye.

If you MUST have zoom-through, then the Century wide angle converter is probably the best to go for (although again, not as cheap as the Impact…and again, I think it would be superior to the Impact model).

Regarding zoom-through wide angles, I also film mainly active documentary style footage, but find that moving my feet provides the needed change of perspective or framing for all wide-angle shoots.

[Jean-Philippe Archibald]

Hi Tony,

I followed your advice an placed an order on an HDV Red-eye adapter. I should have it soon and will post about its performances.

[Ian Stark]

I just bought a Red Eye .7x for the XL2.

I spent a half hour yesterday just tinkering with it and I have to say it is a fantastic piece of kit.

As already stated, minimal distortion (there is some, as you would expect, but really not much) and no vignetting - even when it was sat on top of a UV filter. Non-zoom through isn't an issue for me personally as I tend not to use zoom very much, and when I do it is invariably one of those imperceptibly slow crawls. I am a bit nervous about focusing in the field without a monitor. I had most success using autofocus then switching to manual.

One disappointment - the only one, but a big one for me - is that the sales blurb says "If you own a matte box with filters or bellows you can use the red eye with it".

Unless I am missing something, that is not the case with the Formatt matte box. There is no outer thread on the 72mm adapter ring (the ring for the Formatt, that is) which means the matte box can't be mounted when the Red Eye is in place.

I was so excited about getting the Red Eye for a trip to Kenya in a couple of weeks time to shoot a documentary (my first) and music video for a charity. I SO wanted to use the 4x4 CP and the 0.9 grad ND for lovely skies and ocean shots, taking advantage of the Red Eye. (I had hoped to blag a Canon 3x as well - I've been told that the 3X coupled with the Red Eye gives a HUGE cinematic feel. Sounds gorgeous, but no-one in the UK wants to lend me one!).

Don't suppose there's a solution or that I've missed something simple? Anyone aware of a third party 72mm matte box adaptor ring that is threaded both sides?

Cheers!

Ian . . .

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

Hi Ian - Yes, unfortunately the Red Eye is not double-threaded on both sides. I did ask Rene if he would be making one with double threads, but this would mean designing a different rim and tooling etc.

Do you have the normal aspheric SD Red Eye or the latest HDV FX version? I have both, and do see some improvement in the FX version.

My mattebox vignettes slightly with the 3 X lens, or the 20X + Red Eye anyway, so I only use the Mattebox or Bellows with the 20X lens alone. However, the 20X hood fits neatly over the Red Eye lens, so I tend to just use the Canon hood - and this is enough in most situations.

You can also use circular 72mm Grad filters, Sunset filters, and polarizer filters beneath the Red Eye - between lens & Red Eye filter - (I've found the Pro B+W or the ultra-thin Pro Hoya filters work best). I often use a circular polariser beneath the .7X FX Red Eye. ( I do not use a polarizer with the wider .5 X Red Eye though, as this causes bad colour distortion at the edges).

Regarding using the 0.7X FX Red Eye with the Canon 3 X wide zoom lens...yes, it provides an awesome wide view! Not only is the combination great for some of my outdoor filming, but it also works great in my underwater housing for subsurface work.

[Ian Stark]

Hi Tony,

Shame about the double threading. Actually, I was wondering if anyone manufactured a double threaded adaptor ring for the Formatt matte box, but if you get some vignetting then I'm less sure I want to go there! Which matte box do you use, btw?

I bought the normal SD Red Eye (.5x), mainly because it was in stock and only marginally out of my budget! I do have a (fairly cheap) 72mm polariser but I will have to do some tests later to see if I experience the discolouration you mentioned. To be honest I'm not that excited about using such a cheap piece of glass behind my nice new shiny Red Eye! Where do you source your filters, Tony? In the UK? If I can find a decent grad and polariser then I may leave the matte box at home. Bit bulky anyway.

Thanks for the info.

Ian . . .

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

The best and cheapest place to buy top-grade filters is Ebay...generally much cheaper than buying in shops. I now almost buy and sell everything on Ebay, and even bought my Mercedes on Ebay!
Also take a quick look first at online prices with companies connected to this DVi forum (or in the Dvi selling section - although you must be extremely careful with used filters and unlike lenses which can be mint secondhand, it is often far better to buy new filters to avoid minute marks or hair scratches etc.).