Advice needed on a MX500 / PV-DV953 Purchase

Frank Granovski · December 3rd, 2003, 03:42 AM

$1099 - that's cheap!

(In Canadian that would be around $1380! The going price in Canada is $2450, a difference of over $1000.)

Adam Folickman · December 3rd, 2003, 04:18 AM

Now is the time to buy it Frank !!

By the way, onecall.com, will match any price from a legitimate Pana dealer.

I tried to get onecall.com to match a price from Abe's of Maine or Beach Camera but they said those businesses are "slime bucket shops" and won't match the price (at Abes it was about $1020 including shipping - but who knows if and when you would ever receive the 953 from those guys !!).

So I bought it 15 hours ago from onecall.com (out of Spokane, Washington) and it has already shipped out and will arrive in Ohio on Friday, December 5. Also I have a 30 day defective return policy with onecall.com.

Now, I am looking into wide angle adaptors.

I am looking at the Raynoxs HD 6600 PRO and HD 5000 PRO.

Do you have any first hand expierence regarding these ? Do you think I would see any problems when using the enclosed adaptor ring to fit the HD 5000 onto a 43mm DV953 ?

Thanks.

Adam

Frank Granovski · December 3rd, 2003, 04:31 AM

January might be even a better time to buy. :-)

Onecall does not ship to Canada. Personally, I'd go with B&H---not only because they are a great dealer, but because they are one of our sponsors.

I have never seen these 2 Raynox models, but I've read from members that they are very good. Tom Hardwick tested the HD5000, as I recall. There are some threads on this forum about wides for MX cams.

(Yes, you got a great deal. I'm happy for you.)

Adam Folickman · December 3rd, 2003, 04:40 AM

Tom has given me some good advice on the Wide Angle adaptors via email.

On my other camera, I was using a Tiffen .7x (or .75x ?) and it was really good, however that one is heavy and not going to be wide enough for me anymore.

I agree , B & H is very good, a "flower" among the "crap" that comes out of NYC (especially BROKLYN !!).

Frank Granovski · December 3rd, 2003, 04:50 AM

The Tiffen 43mm's are good, but Tiffen's 37mm's are better---not suited for 43mm threads, though. I would go with what Tom and Allan suggest. Okay, I'm out of here. Tomorrow's another day (hopefully.)

Emmet Lucey · December 3rd, 2003, 12:42 PM

Hey Adam, the raynox 5000 is a beauty, comes with the adapter ring u need.

Robert Mealey · December 4th, 2003, 03:08 AM

I second Emmet's post. I ordered the HD 5000 Pro with the DV-953 and it is awesome. Outstanding resolution edge to edge, a bare minimum of distortion, fully zoom-through and negligible light loss. Also no vignetting, even with a standard B+W 62 mm UV filter. However, go with a Tiffen 43 to 37 step down adapter, metal vs. the plastic Raynox and with a slimmer profile.

Frank Granovski · December 4th, 2003, 04:30 AM

Robert wrote:

Quote:

...However, go with a Tiffen 43 to 37 step down adapter, metal vs. the plastic Raynox and with a slimmer profile.

Huh? Why would you get a 37mm threaded Tiffen wide? The Tiffen 37mm is better than the Tiffen 43mm, but I don't think it's a good idea to use the 37mm on the 43mm threaded Pana. By the way, plastic construction does not effect lens quality.

Adam Folickman · December 4th, 2003, 06:20 AM

Robert and Emmet,

Thanks for the advice.

I am trying to decide whether to buy the RAYNOX HD 5000 or HD 6600.

The advantage of the 6600 is the 43mm thread matches the DV953 thread. But if you guys say that the adapter ring causes no problems, then I should go with the HD 5000.

Regarding the UV filter, you used a regular thread UV filter ? You did not need a slim-line UV filter ?

I don't exactly understand your comment " However, go with a Tiffen 43 to 37 step down adapter, metal vs. the plastic Raynox and with a slimmer profile".

Do you recomend buying a Tiffen 43 to 37 adaptor because it is better than the adaptor RAYNOX provides with the HD 5000 ?

So you find that the HD 5000 stays in foucus through all 10x of the the DV953 zoom ? That is really good. The more I think about it, the better the HD 5000 sounds.

Thanks.

Robert Mealey · December 4th, 2003, 08:04 AM

Adam and Frank,

When I spoke of the Tiffen adapter, I was referring to the adapter mounted between the 43 mm Pana lens and the 37 mm Raynox lens (you got this point Adam). IMO, a metal adapter ring is preferable to a plastic one, especially when it provides a slimmer profile. I have no issues with the quality of the Raynox lens, which I find to be excellent (okay, coating could be better, but you can't have everything for $140). Given that, as I mentioned, there is absolutely no vignetting, even with the standard UV filter, the fact that the Raynox has a 37 mm lens mount is of no concern. I had my fingers crossed when ordering the standard filter, given the extra expense of the B+W slim-line, but, again, it works perfectly.

Robert Mealey · December 4th, 2003, 08:21 AM

Adam,

FYI, I purcahsed my DV-953 from B&H last week. I have dealt with B&H on several occasions and have always found their service and support to be top notch. If you have not dealt with them in the past you can rest assured they are a completely trustworthy and reliable source.

N.B. They dropped the price the day I received mine and with one call they immediately credited my card the $95 difference.

Adam Folickman · December 4th, 2003, 08:29 AM

I understand, Robert.

By the way, did you buy any type of lens hood for the HD 5000 ?

If I put a Multi-Coated UV filter on the HD 5000, do you think a lens hood would be necessary to cut down on flare ?

Thanks for the info.

Robert Mealey · December 5th, 2003, 11:24 AM

Adam,

A lens hood will probably be my next purchase. The B+W UV filter on my cam is the MRC model, but I still caught some glare when shooting under a bright sun on Wednesday. The glare was minor and my own fault in positioning myself in the shot.

Adam Folickman · December 7th, 2003, 10:59 AM

Robert,

If you happen to find a good Lens Hood that works well with the HD 5000, let me know. Thanks.

December 3rd, 2003, 03:42 AM	#16
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	$1099 - that's cheap! (In Canadian that would be around $1380! The going price in Canada is $2450, a difference of over $1000.)

December 3rd, 2003, 04:18 AM	#17
Adam Folickman Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: New Hampshire, USA Posts: 125	Now is the time to buy it Frank !! By the way, onecall.com, will match any price from a legitimate Pana dealer. I tried to get onecall.com to match a price from Abe's of Maine or Beach Camera but they said those businesses are "slime bucket shops" and won't match the price (at Abes it was about $1020 including shipping - but who knows if and when you would ever receive the 953 from those guys !!). So I bought it 15 hours ago from onecall.com (out of Spokane, Washington) and it has already shipped out and will arrive in Ohio on Friday, December 5. Also I have a 30 day defective return policy with onecall.com. Now, I am looking into wide angle adaptors. I am looking at the Raynoxs HD 6600 PRO and HD 5000 PRO. Do you have any first hand expierence regarding these ? Do you think I would see any problems when using the enclosed adaptor ring to fit the HD 5000 onto a 43mm DV953 ? Thanks. Adam

December 3rd, 2003, 04:31 AM	#18
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	January might be even a better time to buy. :-) Onecall does not ship to Canada. Personally, I'd go with B&H---not only because they are a great dealer, but because they are one of our sponsors. I have never seen these 2 Raynox models, but I've read from members that they are very good. Tom Hardwick tested the HD5000, as I recall. There are some threads on this forum about wides for MX cams. (Yes, you got a great deal. I'm happy for you.)

December 3rd, 2003, 04:40 AM	#19
Adam Folickman Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: New Hampshire, USA Posts: 125	Tom has given me some good advice on the Wide Angle adaptors via email. On my other camera, I was using a Tiffen .7x (or .75x ?) and it was really good, however that one is heavy and not going to be wide enough for me anymore. I agree , B & H is very good, a "flower" among the "crap" that comes out of NYC (especially BROKLYN !!).

December 3rd, 2003, 04:50 AM	#20
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	The Tiffen 43mm's are good, but Tiffen's 37mm's are better---not suited for 43mm threads, though. I would go with what Tom and Allan suggest. Okay, I'm out of here. Tomorrow's another day (hopefully.)

December 3rd, 2003, 12:42 PM	#21
Emmet Lucey Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: lillehammer norway Posts: 67	Hey Adam, the raynox 5000 is a beauty, comes with the adapter ring u need.

December 4th, 2003, 03:08 AM	#22
Robert Mealey New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Willoughby, Ohio Posts: 8	I second Emmet's post. I ordered the HD 5000 Pro with the DV-953 and it is awesome. Outstanding resolution edge to edge, a bare minimum of distortion, fully zoom-through and negligible light loss. Also no vignetting, even with a standard B+W 62 mm UV filter. However, go with a Tiffen 43 to 37 step down adapter, metal vs. the plastic Raynox and with a slimmer profile.

December 4th, 2003, 06:20 AM	#24
Adam Folickman Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: New Hampshire, USA Posts: 125	Robert and Emmet, Thanks for the advice. I am trying to decide whether to buy the RAYNOX HD 5000 or HD 6600. The advantage of the 6600 is the 43mm thread matches the DV953 thread. But if you guys say that the adapter ring causes no problems, then I should go with the HD 5000. Regarding the UV filter, you used a regular thread UV filter ? You did not need a slim-line UV filter ? I don't exactly understand your comment " However, go with a Tiffen 43 to 37 step down adapter, metal vs. the plastic Raynox and with a slimmer profile". Do you recomend buying a Tiffen 43 to 37 adaptor because it is better than the adaptor RAYNOX provides with the HD 5000 ? So you find that the HD 5000 stays in foucus through all 10x of the the DV953 zoom ? That is really good. The more I think about it, the better the HD 5000 sounds. Thanks.

December 4th, 2003, 08:04 AM	#25
Robert Mealey New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Willoughby, Ohio Posts: 8	Adam and Frank, When I spoke of the Tiffen adapter, I was referring to the adapter mounted between the 43 mm Pana lens and the 37 mm Raynox lens (you got this point Adam). IMO, a metal adapter ring is preferable to a plastic one, especially when it provides a slimmer profile. I have no issues with the quality of the Raynox lens, which I find to be excellent (okay, coating could be better, but you can't have everything for $140). Given that, as I mentioned, there is absolutely no vignetting, even with the standard UV filter, the fact that the Raynox has a 37 mm lens mount is of no concern. I had my fingers crossed when ordering the standard filter, given the extra expense of the B+W slim-line, but, again, it works perfectly.

December 4th, 2003, 08:21 AM	#26
Robert Mealey New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Willoughby, Ohio Posts: 8	Adam, FYI, I purcahsed my DV-953 from B&H last week. I have dealt with B&H on several occasions and have always found their service and support to be top notch. If you have not dealt with them in the past you can rest assured they are a completely trustworthy and reliable source. N.B. They dropped the price the day I received mine and with one call they immediately credited my card the $95 difference.

December 4th, 2003, 08:29 AM	#27
Adam Folickman Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: New Hampshire, USA Posts: 125	I understand, Robert. By the way, did you buy any type of lens hood for the HD 5000 ? If I put a Multi-Coated UV filter on the HD 5000, do you think a lens hood would be necessary to cut down on flare ? Thanks for the info.

December 5th, 2003, 11:24 AM	#28
Robert Mealey New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Willoughby, Ohio Posts: 8	Adam, A lens hood will probably be my next purchase. The B+W UV filter on my cam is the MRC model, but I still caught some glare when shooting under a bright sun on Wednesday. The glare was minor and my own fault in positioning myself in the shot.

December 7th, 2003, 10:59 AM	#29
Adam Folickman Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: New Hampshire, USA Posts: 125	Robert, If you happen to find a good Lens Hood that works well with the HD 5000, let me know. Thanks.