Tele converter? at DVinfo.net

Paul Shapiro · October 23rd, 2009, 11:42 AM

Has anyone tried a tele converter yet with the HM-100?
Good idea? Bad idea? Which model?

Keith Moreau · October 24th, 2009, 10:35 PM

I'm using a sony Teleconverter that I used with my Sony HC1, with 39mm threads, and a step up ring to the HM100's 46mm threads. There's vignetting at wide but that's not why I have it, I'm usually zoomed in when I need the teleconverter. I like it because I didn't have to buy another one, it's quite clear at a 2x converter (better than some $1000 ones I've seen), and it suffices. I've gotten some pretty good shots with it. The good thing is it's narrow enough to fit inside the ill-advised recessed filter mount, not sure if all could do that.

Another solution might be to use a 72mm teleconverter o the outside hood threads. Much bigger, heaver glass that is prone to CA unless you get the expensive stuff and also depending on the crappy plastic threads on the hood to hold up.

Problem is the crappy plastic HM100 46mm threads won't last a year. We all need to have some manufacturer make a good bayonet mount that fits onto the HM100 bayonet so we can do quick changes instead of depending on slow and weak plastic threads.

Robert Rogoz · October 26th, 2009, 12:37 PM

Paul, I tried Raynox 52mm, but I was not so happy with the results.

Paul Shapiro · October 26th, 2009, 01:13 PM

Thanks Keith and Robert,

European JVC sites list a JVC 1.8 teleconverter, the GL-V1846, but JVC USA and B&H don't show it yet. Has anyone tried this one? I assume it would fit the awful filter threads.

I'm looking for macro tips, too, anyone. Lots of photogenic bugs where I live!

Keith Moreau · October 28th, 2009, 02:09 PM

I also do a fair bit of macro, bugs too. One thing nice about the HM100 (there are a ot of nice things, seems like I'm complaining all the time about it here though) is the macro mode. It really can get some nice close ups without any extra lenses.

For extreme magnification, I use a few macro attachments. For larger filter threads (77mm) I love the Canon Macro 500D, there is also the 250D but both these are probably too large for the HM100.

For the HM100, I use 2 Raynox macro adapters (250 and 150 I think), both have threads but they also have a nice snap on frame for quick-on-off (not for the HM100 though-crappy recessed lens filter -oops complaining again). The clarity of the Raynox is much better than most single element 'diopters' as they (as well as the Canon) seem to have aspheric elements sandwiched together that gives better clarity away from the center.

John Lotterer · October 28th, 2009, 07:19 PM

I found that I had to use a UV filter to to get a step up ring to fit the fine threads , to use my 58mm century fish eye & 2X Tele , seems to work fine

Paul Shapiro · November 2nd, 2009, 10:49 AM

Thanks for the suggestions everyone. Will advise on progress/discoveries.

Paul Shapiro · November 8th, 2009, 03:59 PM

I've finally laid my hands on the jauntily-named JVC GL-V1846U 1.8 teleconverter, which looks like it's been around for a while for older models.

It shows vignetting when zoomed full out and isn't tack sharp at full zoom (both to be expected). But it mostly does the job for the modest price — like the HM-100, it'll do for now!

October 23rd, 2009, 11:42 AM	#1
Paul Shapiro Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Paget, Bermuda Posts: 52	Tele converter? Has anyone tried a tele converter yet with the HM-100? Good idea? Bad idea? Which model?

October 24th, 2009, 10:35 PM	#2
Keith Moreau Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Brisbane, California Posts: 530	I'm using a sony Teleconverter that I used with my Sony HC1, with 39mm threads, and a step up ring to the HM100's 46mm threads. There's vignetting at wide but that's not why I have it, I'm usually zoomed in when I need the teleconverter. I like it because I didn't have to buy another one, it's quite clear at a 2x converter (better than some $1000 ones I've seen), and it suffices. I've gotten some pretty good shots with it. The good thing is it's narrow enough to fit inside the ill-advised recessed filter mount, not sure if all could do that. Another solution might be to use a 72mm teleconverter o the outside hood threads. Much bigger, heaver glass that is prone to CA unless you get the expensive stuff and also depending on the crappy plastic threads on the hood to hold up. Problem is the crappy plastic HM100 46mm threads won't last a year. We all need to have some manufacturer make a good bayonet mount that fits onto the HM100 bayonet so we can do quick changes instead of depending on slow and weak plastic threads.

October 26th, 2009, 12:37 PM	#3
Robert Rogoz Major Player Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bellingham, WA Posts: 457	Paul, I tried Raynox 52mm, but I was not so happy with the results.

October 26th, 2009, 01:13 PM	#4
Paul Shapiro Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Paget, Bermuda Posts: 52	Thanks Keith and Robert, European JVC sites list a JVC 1.8 teleconverter, the GL-V1846, but JVC USA and B&H don't show it yet. Has anyone tried this one? I assume it would fit the awful filter threads. I'm looking for macro tips, too, anyone. Lots of photogenic bugs where I live!

October 28th, 2009, 02:09 PM	#5
Keith Moreau Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Brisbane, California Posts: 530	I also do a fair bit of macro, bugs too. One thing nice about the HM100 (there are a ot of nice things, seems like I'm complaining all the time about it here though) is the macro mode. It really can get some nice close ups without any extra lenses. For extreme magnification, I use a few macro attachments. For larger filter threads (77mm) I love the Canon Macro 500D, there is also the 250D but both these are probably too large for the HM100. For the HM100, I use 2 Raynox macro adapters (250 and 150 I think), both have threads but they also have a nice snap on frame for quick-on-off (not for the HM100 though-crappy recessed lens filter -oops complaining again). The clarity of the Raynox is much better than most single element 'diopters' as they (as well as the Canon) seem to have aspheric elements sandwiched together that gives better clarity away from the center.

October 28th, 2009, 07:19 PM	#6
John Lotterer New Boot Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Mission Viejo Ca Posts: 11	I found that I had to use a UV filter to to get a step up ring to fit the fine threads , to use my 58mm century fish eye & 2X Tele , seems to work fine

November 2nd, 2009, 10:49 AM	#7
Paul Shapiro Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Paget, Bermuda Posts: 52	Thanks for the suggestions everyone. Will advise on progress/discoveries.

November 8th, 2009, 03:59 PM	#8
Paul Shapiro Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Paget, Bermuda Posts: 52	I've finally laid my hands on the jauntily-named JVC GL-V1846U 1.8 teleconverter, which looks like it's been around for a while for older models. It shows vignetting when zoomed full out and isn't tack sharp at full zoom (both to be expected). But it mostly does the job for the modest price — like the HM-100, it'll do for now!