Century wide angle converter

[Michel Brewer]

I bought the new 16xmanual lens, love it however my century wide angle .7 adapter dosent work on this lens anyone heard of a 3rd party fix for this problem? I called century and they were less than no help...so anyone hear anything that could help its making my $600+ investment a waste.....

[Mike Avery]

When I first called Century about this they claimed to have an adaptor in the works.

The last time I called they said they had no idea what I was talking about, and yes, they were pretty rude about it.

Of course their suggestion was to buy a new wide angle to fit the manual lens. That's not going to happen, especially with their bad attitude.

I tried modifying the "threads" on my wide angle, but can't get a snug fit.

For now my solution has been to carry my original auto lens with the wide angle attached to that, but I too would certainly be interested in an adaptor to make it work on my manual lens.

By the way, anyone not happy with the auto lens should take a look at the 16x manual....it's very nice.

Mike Avery

[ronluc8667]

Has anyone had experience with this adapter for use with the stock 16x lens on the XL1s? I can't fork out the $1200 for the Canon 3x Wide Angle lens, but can spend around $400 for the Century Optics adapter.

Thanks,
Ron

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

I own and like this adapter. It does what it says it does: 0.6 magnification, no image distortion.

One early owner of this piece of glass reported that it fell off his camera and broke. He must not have put it on correctly. It goes straight on the lens and then its two pieces twist in opposite directions to make a tight seal. It will not fall off if attached correctly.

This adapter does mount onto the lens hood mount rather than screwing into the filter threads. What does this mean?

1) You must remove your protective UV filter before putting on the 0.6x adapter.
2) You can never use the lens hood while using the 0.6x adapter.

Beyond these two shortcomings, I've found this a nifty little gadget. Is it worth $400? No. It's worth maybe $50. But $400 is what they charge: so it goes.

The 0.6x adapter also has some advantages over the $1000 3x Canon lens. First--the 3x lens has no image stabilizaion. Some people don't care. (I do.) Second, in harsh environments (e.g. beach), I feel a lot less vulnerable removing the UV filter to swap on the 0.6x adapter than removing the whole lens and exposing the CCD to the elements.

By the way, has anybody figured out why the 0.7x adapter costs more than the 0.6x adapter?

[ronluc8667]

Hi Robert.

Thanks for the great information. It really helps. Do you know how much wider an angle the Canon 3X provides over the Century .6X? Are they about the same?

Ron

[Jeff Donald]

Hi,

The standard 16x is 5.5 - 88mm. Multiply the 5.5 by .6 and it give you an effective focal length of 3.3mm. The 3x wide angle is 3.4 - 10.2mm. The 16x with the converter is virtually the same as the 3x at their widest setting. Century also makes a .6x for the WA which in turn makes it 2.04mm or roughly 15mm in 35mm terms.

Jeff

Isn't the 0,6 adapter with the 16x capable of using filters?
Can't you put on a filter between the lens and the adapter, or in front of it?

Also, if you use the 0,6 on the 3x, won't the picture go "fisheye"?


Thanks in advance,

Regards,


Erik T

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

If you use the 0.6x adapter, you can't use filters. This is because the 0.6x adapter doesn't screw into the filter threads; it mounts onto the lens hood mount. If you have an XL1 or XL1S, give a look-see, and you'll understand why it doesn't work.

If you use the 0.6x on the 3x, it won't go fisheye, it'll just go out of focus.

jtdonald provided some valuable numbers. What he doesn't mention is that the 16x lens + 0.6x adapter provides almost the same zoom focal range as the 0.3x Canon lens.

[Don Palomaki]

I believe that the 0.7x adapter cost more because it is full zoom through. The 0.6x is partial zoom through.

Thanks,

So, you can't even use a sunshade? I would need both a sunshade, a polarising filter, and a UV-filter. So in other words, the 3x is the only one for me?


Thanks in advance,


Regards,


Erik T

[Chris Hurd]

Howdy from Texas,

If you need a sunshade, filters, etc. then the 3x lens is definitely the right one for you.

[ronluc8667]

Is it true the Canon 3X lens does not have image stabilization? I read this somewhere.

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

Yes, as mentioned earlier in the thread, it is true that the 3x lacks optical image stabilization.

[Jerry Bixman]

Has anyone found a reasonable sunshade or matte box that would fit this adaptor?

Jerry

[Jeff Donald]

What is the OD of the adapter in mm?

Jeff