WCV-82SC Wide Angle Adapter at DVinfo.net

Daniel Patton · February 14th, 2006, 12:00 PM

Since the Th13X3.5BRMU is priced well above the cost of our JVC HD100, it's not an item that we can budget right now. However, we still need a wider angel of view than the current 16X lens has to offer. We need a short term solution VERY soon, for a few wide(r) establishing shots mostly. A remaining majority of the shots are lined out with the standard 16X, solo (wish us luck).

Has anyone tried "first hand" the wide angle adapter, WCV-82SC?
What negative drawbacks should I expect? I'm realistic here.
Most important, am I wasting my money or can I get some practical use of it?

I am perfectly happy buying the adapter and posting some results if it’s worth the investment.

Thanks in advance.

Diogo Athouguia · February 14th, 2006, 12:32 PM

Check here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=45248

Nate Weaver · February 14th, 2006, 12:42 PM

It's been covered here too, but the short story is that it's barely wide enough, but it's sharp and doesn't add any more CA.

In other words, it does the job well.

Daniel Patton · February 14th, 2006, 02:24 PM

Nate,

Agreed, after reading Tim's post and looking at the pix on the DVX forum (I had searched DVinfo and found nothing under the GY-HD100 section btw), I'm not so sure the adapter adds enough to justify the cost. I would like to see another example of with and without the WCV-82SC of something like a storefront... or anything between 50-100' from camera.

I contacted Cavision about the 0.7x adapter they sell and it's a fair amount less money, quoted at $359. Anyone thoughts on the Cavision adapter?

Warren Shultz · February 14th, 2006, 05:54 PM

Here's a shot out my (dirty) office window with stock lens full wide and stock with wide adapter.
http://www.rvimedia.com/pics/house-wide-stock.jpg
http://www.rvimedia.com/pics/house-wide-adapter.jpg

I'd estimate the house is about 30-40 yards distant.

I'm not sure what conditions aggravate the CA but it's bad today.

Diogo Athouguia · February 14th, 2006, 07:56 PM

Not much difference, but good enough in my opinion. I will get one because I need it for shooting SD 4:3. A good thing about this adapter is that you can use all zoom, I don't know about the Cavision one.

Daniel Weber · February 14th, 2006, 09:44 PM

I bought a Cavision adapter for my JVC 500 a few years back. sent it back to Canada as quick as I could. Lost money on the taxes and shipping I had to pay. Biggest piece of crap that I ever bought. If you think that the stock 16x lens has CA, wait until you see the Cavision stuff. Didn't have zoom all the way thru the lens. Pay the extra money and get the JVC or Century Optics stuff. Saving a few hundred dollars isn't worth the crappy images your camera will get with the Cavision stuff.

Dan Weber

Daniel Patton · February 15th, 2006, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren Shultz

Here's a shot out my (dirty) office window with stock lens full wide and stock with wide adapter.
http://www.rvimedia.com/pics/house-wide-stock.jpg
http://www.rvimedia.com/pics/house-wide-adapter.jpg

I'd estimate the house is about 30-40 yards distant.

I'm not sure what conditions aggravate the CA but it's bad today.

Warren,

Thank you VERY much for doing that, it's more than appreciated! We are going to purchase one first thing in the morning. Although it is hard to justify the price associated with such a small addition to viewing area, we need all that we can get right now.

And thank you Daniel for saving us the hassle, time and money on the Cavision adapter.

This forum has been worth it's weight in gold.

February 14th, 2006, 12:00 PM	#1
Daniel Patton Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Knoxville TN Posts: 589	WCV-82SC Wide Angle Adapter Since the Th13X3.5BRMU is priced well above the cost of our JVC HD100, it's not an item that we can budget right now. However, we still need a wider angel of view than the current 16X lens has to offer. We need a short term solution VERY soon, for a few wide(r) establishing shots mostly. A remaining majority of the shots are lined out with the standard 16X, solo (wish us luck). Has anyone tried "first hand" the wide angle adapter, WCV-82SC? What negative drawbacks should I expect? I'm realistic here. Most important, am I wasting my money or can I get some practical use of it? I am perfectly happy buying the adapter and posting some results if it’s worth the investment. Thanks in advance. __________________ Our eyes allow us to see the world - The lens allows others to see the world through our eyes. RED ONE #977

February 14th, 2006, 12:42 PM	#3
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	It's been covered here too, but the short story is that it's barely wide enough, but it's sharp and doesn't add any more CA. In other words, it does the job well. __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

February 14th, 2006, 02:24 PM	#4
Daniel Patton Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Knoxville TN Posts: 589	Nate, Agreed, after reading Tim's post and looking at the pix on the DVX forum (I had searched DVinfo and found nothing under the GY-HD100 section btw), I'm not so sure the adapter adds enough to justify the cost. I would like to see another example of with and without the WCV-82SC of something like a storefront... or anything between 50-100' from camera. I contacted Cavision about the 0.7x adapter they sell and it's a fair amount less money, quoted at $359. Anyone thoughts on the Cavision adapter? __________________ Our eyes allow us to see the world - The lens allows others to see the world through our eyes. RED ONE #977

February 14th, 2006, 05:54 PM	#5
Warren Shultz Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 248	wide comparison pics Here's a shot out my (dirty) office window with stock lens full wide and stock with wide adapter. http://www.rvimedia.com/pics/house-wide-stock.jpg http://www.rvimedia.com/pics/house-wide-adapter.jpg I'd estimate the house is about 30-40 yards distant. I'm not sure what conditions aggravate the CA but it's bad today.

February 14th, 2006, 09:44 PM	#7
Daniel Weber Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Maryland, USA Posts: 696	Cavision I bought a Cavision adapter for my JVC 500 a few years back. sent it back to Canada as quick as I could. Lost money on the taxes and shipping I had to pay. Biggest piece of crap that I ever bought. If you think that the stock 16x lens has CA, wait until you see the Cavision stuff. Didn't have zoom all the way thru the lens. Pay the extra money and get the JVC or Century Optics stuff. Saving a few hundred dollars isn't worth the crappy images your camera will get with the Cavision stuff. Dan Weber

February 14th, 2006, 12:32 PM	#2
Diogo Athouguia Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Portugal Posts: 282	Check here: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=45248

February 14th, 2006, 07:56 PM	#6
Diogo Athouguia Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Portugal Posts: 282	Not much difference, but good enough in my opinion. I will get one because I need it for shooting SD 4:3. A good thing about this adapter is that you can use all zoom, I don't know about the Cavision one.