More Wide Angle Converter Questions

[Chris Long]

Excellent, Jan. I'm looking at purchasing it, too. I look forward to your comments about it!

89 Euros is a good price, I think--I see that B and H here in the US sells it for 139 US dollars, which I think is about 117 Euros.

Other dealers have it for less, but I'm not sure that I trust them...

[Jan Roovers]

The price was given by a known photoshop in Leiden. They know what they are alking about. They set for years now stunning prices. Leiden is a universitytown and they sell a lot to students and academics.

I think that such a lens can never go wrong.
They had to order it themself , so I know it is new in box and not used :-)

[Chris Long]

Jan--

Sinter Klaus (or Black Peter?) is bringing me a Raynox HD-5000PRO this Christmas, though I don't think I am supposed to know that ;^)

It's hard to wait for it (2 more weeks!), and I was wondering: have you have gotten yours yet, and have you had a chance to evaluate it?

[Jan Roovers]

Chris--
No not yet. They orderded the wrong one. So they had to do it over. I think I will phone them today if the proper lens has arrived now.
:-)

In this case I am my own "Sinter Klaus" and I am curious enough to evaluate the lens soon: before Christmas.

[Boyd Ostroff]

Take a look at the horizon line in this frame grab. It should give you an idea of the barrel distortion with the .45x Titanium wide adaptor on the PDX-10.

Personally I like this effect and don't think it is all that odd. As Tom notes, the built-in lens is way too narrow and needs some help!

[Shawn Mielke]

Yes please, Jan, tell us all about the Raynox, and don't hold back!

[Chris Long]

I'll post a "review" of it, as well, when I get it in my hands (sometime on the morning of the 25th...) I ordered it from BugEyeDigital (they have it for $89US), and was pleased that it came very quickly and well-packed. Then it was spirited away to be giftwrapped.

I'm wondering, besides shooting things and checking focus throughout the zoom range, paying attention to how it shows detail, how the edges look, etc; exactly how I might do a really good review of it's qualities? Is there a good method I might follow? Some sort of template for checking it out? Never done it before in any way other than eyeballing it...

[Jan Roovers]

shawn

My lens has not arived yet . I hope it will be delivered before Christmas. I will return with my "review" as soon i have tried it.

[Tom Hardwick]

Chris - here's the test method I use. Set up your camera perpendicular to a brick wall and use a solid tripod. Side of your house is ideal - include door frames, wondows and any odds and ends that are lying about for details.

Shoot to Memory stick as this will show up the greatest detail when the frames are pulled into Photoshop for analysis. It also uses more of the chip area so any potential vignetting will be more obvious. Vary the shutter speed and shoot at maximum and minimum aperture (difficult to determine with the 950/PDX10).

Shoot at max wide-angle on the camera, then attach the wide converter and zoom to the same focal length (to give the same picture in the v/finder). Make notes. Compare these two frames in Photoshop. Look for colour and exposure differences. Look for distortion of straight lines, vignetting, flare and chromatic aberation. The brick wall test is excellent and shows faults very quickly indeed.

tom.

[Chris Long]

Thanks, Tom. I'll do it, if and when Christmas gets here ;^)

[Jan Roovers]

I got my Rainox this afternoon ! So I have not been able yet to test the lens in daylight, but my first impression is very satisfying:

1. The lens fits well in the wideanglehood from the PDx10.
2. The picture is sharp and full zoom thru.
3. Sharpening works as usual, automatic and manually!
4. In widescreen 16x9 there is practically no vignetting. I saw a very little darker border in one of the corners, but so small that it is very much out of the safe zone. It can not be seen on the LCD screen or in the viewfinder or on television.
5. In picturemode the vignetting is more visable in the corner.
The lens is delivered with a 37 to 37 (distance-)adapterring, but can be mounted on the PDX10 without it if no (UV-) filter is attached. I will try that tomorrow. I think that will help.

Overall the picture is very clear and very satisfying. I will test it tomorrow in daylight. The big advantage of the wideangle is also that it smoothes any unwanted movement of the cam, which occurs when no tripod is used. I could walk slowly with good results.

[Jan Roovers]

It was terribly raining and dark today. So I could not do much to test this wideangle convertor.
But I shot two stills to compare.
1. As said before: the PDX10 does not need the standard distance ring and when attached directly to the lens no vignetting can be seen.
2. The convertor is sharp in the middle but looses some sharpness in the borders. It is sharp within a circle with a diagonal of 50% of the diagonal in still mode. In Photoshop a softer contrast and a little less detail can be seen outside this innercircle.
I think it is the compromise of a convertor. What is your experience?
Nevertheless the picture looks well if not immediately compared and the problem will not be les evident in 4x3 videomode. In 16x9 mode however the left and right outsides are less sharp.

I have uploaded the pictures at:
Stills for comparison
As soon the weather will allow me I will make some more stills and frameshots.

[Chris Long]

Thanks for the review(s), Jan, and for posting the still pictures. Very nice! I do see the blur in the corners you speak off--in the bicycle wheel at the left, for instance--though I wonder if the headlights of the car had any effect on the overall picture. Probably not, I guess.

Overall, very nice--I'm looking forward to getting my hands on mine. Thanks again!

[Jan Roovers]

Chris:

I agree that the bike is not representative.
But you see a difference in
1. the houses at the left right above the bridge.
2. the poster on the workmans car
3. the cars at the right
4. the trees at the top.

The center of the picture is perfect.

It was 14.00 hr midday. You can see how dark and rainy it was.
I think the rain is affecting the picture also. Remember the lens is about two times bigger, 62 mm against 37 mm, so it will "catch" two times more raindrops in its field of view.

It was less apparent in tungstenlight inside my house.

One strong point is that this convertor has little or no color-diffraction/fringing.

I would be pleased to see comparison pictures from other wideangle convertors to. There must be a lot of wideangle convertors amongst members of the forum. Tom Hardwick's advise of testing pleases me.

So i will ask others to share some comparison pics with us from there wideangle convertors. It helps with a kind of forumreview.

[David Korb]

Actually Jan..i really like the photo without the wa lens...am less impressed with the edges of your wide shot...was goinna shop for a w/a lens and now im not sure...does the tiffen and kenko also deliver soft edges ??