43mm wide angle lenses - choices & prices

Frank Granovski · June 17th, 2003, 02:37 AM

The Tiffen 43mm is only .75, I think. That's a shame because the Tiffen 37mm wide is around .5, and also a much better wide than the 43mm thread size model. When I have the time, I'll take my MX down to the shop and compare these 2 adaptors. Since Tom has done an extensive test, perhaps go with what he suggests.

When I did test the Tiffen, I noticed good zoom through. I also noticed the high quality body and glass. The Tiffen is heavy, so it will add a lot of extra weight in front of your cam. If you do decide on the Tiffen, you can get one here (I'll just give you an e-mail contact for Leo's Cameras):

peter@leoscamera.com

Peter can answer all your wide angle questions as well, since he's always testing these items in the shop.

Boyan Dob · June 17th, 2003, 03:33 AM

http://www.tiffen.com/digital_MegaPlusLenses.htm
...here you can see that Tiffen 0.56x is available in the most common thread sizes: 30mm, 37mm, and 43mm.

So, for me there are just two options to choose from (considering the price and what you get for it):

1) Raynox 43mm 0.66x
2) Tiffen 43mm 0.56x

...so Frank, if you could compare these two a bit it would be great.

Tom, I appreciate you putting the extract of your review! Tho, since you haven't had Tiffen 43mm 0.56x in your review it's still impossible for me to tell which to choose...

Frank Granovski · June 17th, 2003, 12:42 PM

Oh..., this .56X must be newer. I'll have to take a look at that one...tomorrow, along with the Raynox HD5000 Pro. I'll phone around this afternoon, just to make sure---.

Frank Granovski · June 17th, 2003, 02:25 PM

I talked to Chris at Beau Photo, a professional dealer in Vancouver---just down the street from me! Surprisingly, they also tested a number of wide angle adaptors. Their conclusion is that "the numbers" were a lot higher than the Tiffen, but non of them are total zoom through as Tom had mentioned. Keep in mind that with an adaptor, you're not going to be zooming around while you're shooting. Or are you? I wouldn't. So, at this point in time I think that the Raynox HD 5000 Pro would be a good bet. But don't discount Yow Cheong Hoe's fujifilm suggestion.

Beau Photo can be reached with this e-mail:

prosales@beauphoto.com

Boyan Dob · June 18th, 2003, 06:40 AM

Frank, thanks so much for all your efforts!

First, as for zooming using WA while shooting, well sometimes yes, but not at high zoom levels.

For example: imagine recording a volleyball match, mostly you record action at the net. But you also zoom at players doing the serve, since you can not run from the net to the one who serves. And sometimes you zoom at the hitter at the net more closely... In short, WA lens is great when shooting in the centre - to capture more of the playing court...

So, I would like to have lens with least distortion possible. Raynox 0.5x distorts image too much. So far best looks Raynox 0.66x -- have you checked images I prepared? See: http://wwww.24get.com/WAL/

The only lens I have no idea how it distorts the image is that new Tiffen 0.56x.... Well, if you have the chance we'd be all glad here to see how all the three compare:

1) Raynox 43mm 0.66x
2) Raynox 43mm 0.5x
3) Tiffen 43mm 0.56x

Frank Granovski · June 19th, 2003, 02:25 PM

I can't find the Raynox HD5000 Pro locally.

The tiffen seems good, but I cannot compare it with this Raynox. I tried 1 Raynox, a cheaper one, and found it to be okay but not as good as the Tiffen, though I noticed the Raynox was wider. The Tiffen had good zoom-through, and I couldn't notice any distortion.

On some older threads at dv.com, Terrence had mentioned that the Panasonic wide is completely zoom-through.

Since Tom actually did a test on a number of adaptors, I suggest you go with his advice. So, from what I gather, the 3 best wides are:

Panasonic's
Tiffen's
& Raynox's HD5000 PRO, though you'll have to use a ring.

Also, the Pana does not have filter threads on the front. Which one would I buy today? With what I can see, the Tiffen. I would go for the Pana, though, if it had filter threads. (But it doesn't.)

Yow Cheong Hoe · June 21st, 2003, 04:59 AM

Well, sadly, the Fuji 0.79x is also not fully zoom through, only good for up to about 4x zoom on my MX350. Beyond that, softening and bluring occurs at the edges.

As for using 55mm or 52mm instead of 43mm, the vignetting issue will certainly be improved when stacking filters.

Oh, the fuji WA is coated, which gives less flaring.

Boyan Dob · June 21st, 2003, 06:05 AM

Thanks Frank for your efforts and info! May I also ask which tripod you recommend or what are the choices?

Frank Granovski · June 21st, 2003, 01:36 PM

You have many good choices for tripods, and you don't have to spend a lot of money, since these cams are small and light. You'll want something stable, not too light, something that can be adjusted and balanced fast, with a smooth head. Though expensive and overkill, I would like to get the Miller DS5---can't afford it right now. My present tripod is a Manfrotto #075B with a #136 head. It works well but it takes a bit of time to set up.

Rick Tugman · September 3rd, 2003, 11:38 PM

So now I'm looking for a wide angle adapter for my DV953. I don't want anything too heavy, but like the look of the following:

Raynox XL5000PRO Super Wide Angle .5X
and the
Tiffen 0.56X

My usage is for shooting live shots for live sports programs for example - shooting field from the press box in a stadium where I could see the "whole" field or bowl of the stadium (without fish eye effect) or as a slam cam mounted behind a basketball backboard looking through the glass to see the rim and center court.

I don't believe the Raynox HD6600PRO .66X is wide enough to acheive what I want.

Since the postings here does anyone have any thing further to add with regards to their experience on the 43 mm wide angle adapters and your use with video DV camcorders. A follow up to as to anyone's experience with the new Tiffen 0.56X and any other adapter would be great!

Thanks in advance.

Frank Granovski · September 4th, 2003, 12:04 AM

I'll phone around and see if anyone has this new Tiffen in Vancouver. If I find one, I go have a look at it. Of course, I'll bring along my MX300 so that I can try it. I'll follow up tomorrow.

Eng Yew Lee · September 4th, 2003, 12:59 AM

I bought a Raynox HD-6600Pro43 43mm 0.66x Wide Angle Lens for my GS100 and I have used a Canon Wide Angle on my older camcorder (can't remember but I think it was a 0.6 too).

My observations on the Raynox in ProCinema mode after two weeks of intensive use are:

1) No noticable distortion even when zooming to 3x (I did not have to go further). This is a key benefit, the scenes look very natural. I can shoot any type of scene with the Raynox attached. The Canon distorted and made scenes look a bit "dizzy".

2) Excellent color and image quality! No impact on GS100K color saturation or clarity.

3) Significant flare. You need to be concious of the light points and avoid them. Even if the light or sun is not in the shot, the glare will come through. My old Canon did not have so much flare. I don't own a lens hood.

4) Makes the GS100 front heavy. But, hey, every Wide Angle Converter will do that.

In general, I am very happy with the Raynox. I can live with the flaring given the lack of distortion and the image quality.

BTW. I don't know if the flaring is worse that other non-distorting lenses. When I was watching the beginning of LOTR II with the wide shots of mountain tops, I noticed flaring in one shot when the sun was not in view.

Rick Tugman · September 4th, 2003, 08:49 AM

Thanks Frank and Eng:

Frank no rush, as I'm leaving for New York tomorrow - it's a long trip for me this time as I'm also going to Puerto Rico and then on to Washington DC and the Baltimore area. So I won't see your reply till I return on Sept 15 as I'm not taking my laptop with me.

My colleagues who do shoot and do video for a living told me to get a .8 wide angle. Since I don't see one that comes close for the 43mm I think the Raynox XL5000 Pro Super Wide .5x or the new Tiffen MegaPlus 0.75x come close to the look I'm looking for. I will not be zooming as the camera would be fixed and mounted on some occasions, but I understand the reason to look for distortion in zooming especially when your trying to crop the shot properly in my situation. You have to have some control in framing.

Thanks once again.

All the best.... Rick

Bill Gibson · September 27th, 2003, 09:25 PM

I have just ordered the Optura Xi - many thanks to Allan and others for their insights. My decision was based on great 16:9, performance under good light and a great OIS.

I want to add a wide angle adaptor and still be able to use filters, polarizing, ND and graduated effects primarily. As far as I can tell from the pictures the Canon .7x lens has no filter thread; the Raynox 6600 does. Raynox 6600 however is not available for 46mm thread. So my questions:

Is there any problem adding a step-up ring between the camera and the WA adaptor? Does increasing the lens to lens distance increase the risk of vignetting and edge distortion?

What are the issues adding filters to the Raynox? Again, does that increase the risk of vignetting? If so, does using a step-up ring between WA and filter reduce the effect?

Eng Yew Lee · September 28th, 2003, 01:37 AM

I agree with Tom. I own a Raynox and there is zero detectable distortion and color saturation remains true to form. I have only use it to zoom to 3x (never to 10x) and have not noticed any distortion.

However, the coating is not as good as I have seen. Thus there is a fair amount of flaring. Its not so bad but it is noticable.

June 21st, 2003, 04:59 AM	#22
Yow Cheong Hoe Major Player Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Singapore, Passport: Malaysia Posts: 407	Well, sadly, the Fuji 0.79x is also not fully zoom through, only good for up to about 4x zoom on my MX350. Beyond that, softening and bluring occurs at the edges. As for using 55mm or 52mm instead of 43mm, the vignetting issue will certainly be improved when stacking filters. Oh, the fuji WA is coated, which gives less flaring. __________________ Cam: Panasonic MX350EN, SOLD my MX8EN Mac: G3 400MHz PowerBook, 256 MB, OS 9 PC: Pentium 4 2800MHz, 512 MB, WindowsXP SW: iMovie, Final Cut Pro, Adobe Premiere, Ulead Video Studio, various little utilities

September 3rd, 2003, 11:38 PM	#25
Rick Tugman Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Parkland, Florida Posts: 105	So has anyone made an update for this thread! So now I'm looking for a wide angle adapter for my DV953. I don't want anything too heavy, but like the look of the following: Raynox XL5000PRO Super Wide Angle .5X and the Tiffen 0.56X My usage is for shooting live shots for live sports programs for example - shooting field from the press box in a stadium where I could see the "whole" field or bowl of the stadium (without fish eye effect) or as a slam cam mounted behind a basketball backboard looking through the glass to see the rim and center court. I don't believe the Raynox HD6600PRO .66X is wide enough to acheive what I want. Since the postings here does anyone have any thing further to add with regards to their experience on the 43 mm wide angle adapters and your use with video DV camcorders. A follow up to as to anyone's experience with the new Tiffen 0.56X and any other adapter would be great! Thanks in advance. __________________ Camera: Panasonic DV953 PC: Apple Aluminum G4 Powerbook - 15 inch Final Cut Pro 4 and other assorted goodies!

September 4th, 2003, 08:49 AM	#28
Rick Tugman Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Parkland, Florida Posts: 105	Thanks Frank and Eng: Frank no rush, as I'm leaving for New York tomorrow - it's a long trip for me this time as I'm also going to Puerto Rico and then on to Washington DC and the Baltimore area. So I won't see your reply till I return on Sept 15 as I'm not taking my laptop with me. My colleagues who do shoot and do video for a living told me to get a .8 wide angle. Since I don't see one that comes close for the 43mm I think the Raynox XL5000 Pro Super Wide .5x or the new Tiffen MegaPlus 0.75x come close to the look I'm looking for. I will not be zooming as the camera would be fixed and mounted on some occasions, but I understand the reason to look for distortion in zooming especially when your trying to crop the shot properly in my situation. You have to have some control in framing. Thanks once again. All the best.... Rick __________________ Camera: Panasonic DV953 PC: Apple Aluminum G4 Powerbook - 15 inch Final Cut Pro 4 and other assorted goodies!

June 17th, 2003, 02:37 AM	#16
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	The Tiffen 43mm is only .75, I think. That's a shame because the Tiffen 37mm wide is around .5, and also a much better wide than the 43mm thread size model. When I have the time, I'll take my MX down to the shop and compare these 2 adaptors. Since Tom has done an extensive test, perhaps go with what he suggests. When I did test the Tiffen, I noticed good zoom through. I also noticed the high quality body and glass. The Tiffen is heavy, so it will add a lot of extra weight in front of your cam. If you do decide on the Tiffen, you can get one here (I'll just give you an e-mail contact for Leo's Cameras): peter@leoscamera.com Peter can answer all your wide angle questions as well, since he's always testing these items in the shop.

June 17th, 2003, 03:33 AM	#17
Boyan Dob Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Slovenia Posts: 45	http://www.tiffen.com/digital_MegaPlusLenses.htm ...here you can see that Tiffen 0.56x is available in the most common thread sizes: 30mm, 37mm, and 43mm. So, for me there are just two options to choose from (considering the price and what you get for it): 1) Raynox 43mm 0.66x 2) Tiffen 43mm 0.56x ...so Frank, if you could compare these two a bit it would be great. Tom, I appreciate you putting the extract of your review! Tho, since you haven't had Tiffen 43mm 0.56x in your review it's still impossible for me to tell which to choose...

June 17th, 2003, 12:42 PM	#18
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Oh..., this .56X must be newer. I'll have to take a look at that one...tomorrow, along with the Raynox HD5000 Pro. I'll phone around this afternoon, just to make sure---.

June 17th, 2003, 02:25 PM	#19
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I talked to Chris at Beau Photo, a professional dealer in Vancouver---just down the street from me! Surprisingly, they also tested a number of wide angle adaptors. Their conclusion is that "the numbers" were a lot higher than the Tiffen, but non of them are total zoom through as Tom had mentioned. Keep in mind that with an adaptor, you're not going to be zooming around while you're shooting. Or are you? I wouldn't. So, at this point in time I think that the Raynox HD 5000 Pro would be a good bet. But don't discount Yow Cheong Hoe's fujifilm suggestion. Beau Photo can be reached with this e-mail: prosales@beauphoto.com

June 18th, 2003, 06:40 AM	#20
Boyan Dob Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Slovenia Posts: 45	Frank, thanks so much for all your efforts! First, as for zooming using WA while shooting, well sometimes yes, but not at high zoom levels. For example: imagine recording a volleyball match, mostly you record action at the net. But you also zoom at players doing the serve, since you can not run from the net to the one who serves. And sometimes you zoom at the hitter at the net more closely... In short, WA lens is great when shooting in the centre - to capture more of the playing court... So, I would like to have lens with least distortion possible. Raynox 0.5x distorts image too much. So far best looks Raynox 0.66x -- have you checked images I prepared? See: http://wwww.24get.com/WAL/ The only lens I have no idea how it distorts the image is that new Tiffen 0.56x.... Well, if you have the chance we'd be all glad here to see how all the three compare: 1) Raynox 43mm 0.66x 2) Raynox 43mm 0.5x 3) Tiffen 43mm 0.56x

June 19th, 2003, 02:25 PM	#21
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I can't find the Raynox HD5000 Pro locally. The tiffen seems good, but I cannot compare it with this Raynox. I tried 1 Raynox, a cheaper one, and found it to be okay but not as good as the Tiffen, though I noticed the Raynox was wider. The Tiffen had good zoom-through, and I couldn't notice any distortion. On some older threads at dv.com, Terrence had mentioned that the Panasonic wide is completely zoom-through. Since Tom actually did a test on a number of adaptors, I suggest you go with his advice. So, from what I gather, the 3 best wides are: Panasonic's Tiffen's & Raynox's HD5000 PRO, though you'll have to use a ring. Also, the Pana does not have filter threads on the front. Which one would I buy today? With what I can see, the Tiffen. I would go for the Pana, though, if it had filter threads. (But it doesn't.)

June 21st, 2003, 06:05 AM	#23
Boyan Dob Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Slovenia Posts: 45	Thanks Frank for your efforts and info! May I also ask which tripod you recommend or what are the choices?

June 21st, 2003, 01:36 PM	#24
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	You have many good choices for tripods, and you don't have to spend a lot of money, since these cams are small and light. You'll want something stable, not too light, something that can be adjusted and balanced fast, with a smooth head. Though expensive and overkill, I would like to get the Miller DS5---can't afford it right now. My present tripod is a Manfrotto #075B with a #136 head. It works well but it takes a bit of time to set up.

September 4th, 2003, 12:04 AM	#26
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I'll phone around and see if anyone has this new Tiffen in Vancouver. If I find one, I go have a look at it. Of course, I'll bring along my MX300 so that I can try it. I'll follow up tomorrow.

September 4th, 2003, 12:59 AM	#27
Eng Yew Lee Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Castro Valley, CA, USA Posts: 32	I bought a Raynox HD-6600Pro43 43mm 0.66x Wide Angle Lens for my GS100 and I have used a Canon Wide Angle on my older camcorder (can't remember but I think it was a 0.6 too). My observations on the Raynox in ProCinema mode after two weeks of intensive use are: 1) No noticable distortion even when zooming to 3x (I did not have to go further). This is a key benefit, the scenes look very natural. I can shoot any type of scene with the Raynox attached. The Canon distorted and made scenes look a bit "dizzy". 2) Excellent color and image quality! No impact on GS100K color saturation or clarity. 3) Significant flare. You need to be concious of the light points and avoid them. Even if the light or sun is not in the shot, the glare will come through. My old Canon did not have so much flare. I don't own a lens hood. 4) Makes the GS100 front heavy. But, hey, every Wide Angle Converter will do that. In general, I am very happy with the Raynox. I can live with the flaring given the lack of distortion and the image quality. BTW. I don't know if the flaring is worse that other non-distorting lenses. When I was watching the beginning of LOTR II with the wide shots of mountain tops, I noticed flaring in one shot when the sun was not in view.

September 27th, 2003, 09:25 PM	#29
Bill Gibson Tourist Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 3	I have just ordered the Optura Xi - many thanks to Allan and others for their insights. My decision was based on great 16:9, performance under good light and a great OIS. I want to add a wide angle adaptor and still be able to use filters, polarizing, ND and graduated effects primarily. As far as I can tell from the pictures the Canon .7x lens has no filter thread; the Raynox 6600 does. Raynox 6600 however is not available for 46mm thread. So my questions: Is there any problem adding a step-up ring between the camera and the WA adaptor? Does increasing the lens to lens distance increase the risk of vignetting and edge distortion? What are the issues adding filters to the Raynox? Again, does that increase the risk of vignetting? If so, does using a step-up ring between WA and filter reduce the effect?

September 28th, 2003, 01:37 AM	#30
Eng Yew Lee Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Castro Valley, CA, USA Posts: 32	I agree with Tom. I own a Raynox and there is zero detectable distortion and color saturation remains true to form. I have only use it to zoom to 3x (never to 10x) and have not noticed any distortion. However, the coating is not as good as I have seen. Thus there is a fair amount of flaring. Its not so bad but it is noticable.