More Wide Angle Converter Questions

Chris Long · January 6th, 2004, 08:21 AM

Jan, I haven't done a great deal of shooting with it yet. The few minutes of tape that I've run through it have left me very pleased.

Using still photos to judge the quality of the adapter is a fine thing to do, and must be the most accurate way of seeing how good it really is, I guess. I'm no expert, that's for sure. But for my purposes--non-professional, part-time, but nice-quality video--that method of judgement is probably more punitive than I need. So just by shooting some video, so far I'd say that it looks great! I'm extremely happy to have the extra field of view, and don't notice a tremendous amount of dropoff in resolution toward the edges. It's there, I'm know--I just don't think it's noticeable in the average video (not still) shot. Casual viewers don't actively look for that kind of thing, and it's hard to see anyway, as far as I can tell. So I like the Raynox very much.

I like the little plastic case it comes in (better than the soft pouch my last adapter came with). I like the lens caps, especially the front one, which solves my problem of having the Sony cap flapping around. It fits in the Sony's hood well, though I had one problem: I couldn't get the adapter to fit into the wide hood without screwing it into the UV filter ring I had attached to the PDX lens. Maybe if I try harder, I can get it to work (I was perhaps a bit impatient to get it attached on Christmas morning hehe). But attached to the UV ring, it's fine.

I like it a lot. It seems solid and well-built. I'll let you know more, if I manage to get more shot soon. Thanks for asking!

Bryan Beasleigh · January 6th, 2004, 04:31 PM

Tom
Cavision have made several changes in their lens since your review. They are made in a different factory alltogether. I think ther're still Chinese though.

Too bad OpTex don't make an adapter for the smaller lenses. I really like mine. It never comes off.

Tom Hardwick · January 8th, 2004, 10:05 AM

That's interesting Bryan. I guessed they would change the design of the 0.5X. But I thought they were made in Canada - or at least bought in from Japan. But China? What gives you this idea?

tom.

Bryan Beasleigh · January 9th, 2004, 09:43 PM

The owner of Cavision and his wife (Catherine) came to Canada from China and set up businness in Vancouver, BC, Canada. All of the product that i've seen (matte boxes, boom poles etc) is manufactured in china and assembled in Canada. I have visited their office and bought my matte box last May . While I was ther I mentioned that several people had issues with the lense quality. Catherine mentioned that they had a new design and a new source from the orient. The new source could be Japan but I doubt it.

Catherine and the salesman had mentioned the owner was in China keeping an eye on production. Everything I saw (non optical) looked to be of excellent quality. The owners of Cavision are very serious about a quality product.

My opinion is the non optical stuff is damn good. if i want a lense i'll stay with the people that have a history in optical production.

John Hartney · January 13th, 2004, 10:24 AM

I'm using a Canon WD58 with a pdx10 to good results.

Full zoom through with crisp, even image and very little distortion at focal length extreams. A 37>58mm ring is less than $7 at B&H.

I always use the large battery on the camera and it maintains a fairly good balance, certainly workable. It holds up in 16:9 on projects alongside my Ikegami HL-DV7, clients are pleased, so am I. It's a great palmcorder and the Canon lens is a good compliment.

Best,

John

Jan Roovers · January 13th, 2004, 02:10 PM

Please post a sampleshot of this convertor.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating!

John Hartney · January 17th, 2004, 10:03 PM

Sorry Jan,

I don't have any still ready to post and no free time to cull some, I've been very busy.

If I'm able, I'll post some for you, but I've offered my opinion... I just shot a dueling knights sequence for Medival Times using it.... I use it in as a tool on paying productions on a regular basis without any complaints, only compliments.

Best,

John

Neftali Cano · January 18th, 2004, 05:30 PM

I just purchased my first PDX10 and the Century WA convertor .65x along with it.

I was very interested in the Canon WD58 as well, but went ahead and spent the extra $ for the Century lens.

That said as soon as the camera comes in later this week I'll grab some images with the adapter on and off as well as 4x3 and 16x9 shots.

Ignacio Rodriguez · February 1st, 2004, 09:16 PM

I found this used Sony branded WA adapter a few days ago. It is in bad shape, has some scratches on the front element and some dust on the inside, however these are not very visible when using the adapter and it is MUCH better than any WA adapter I have ever tried yet. Has very little chromatic abberation and focuses well across the whole field. No vignetting in 16x9 or 4x3. Very little internal reflections. Had to buy a 46mm to 47mm adapter ring. I bought it used for about US$20, plus about US$9 for the ring. The model is VCL-0746C. It's only x0.7... but it's good enough to leave on the camera for casual use. Pretty awesome. So my advice is, before commiting to spending big bucks at B&H, go shop around for used stuff, you might find things like this which can make a big difference for your images without leaving such a big hole in your wallet. The front element is strangely concave... I wonder if all the better WA adapters are like that. My previous one is not, at least not on the outside. Anybody knows who might have made this for Sony?

Tom Hardwick · February 2nd, 2004, 06:46 AM

Yes, concave front elements are indeed unusual in wide-angle converters. I have a Tecpro 0.5s that has just such a front element. It's a two element design and the lens comes apart (unscrews) to leave behing a very powerful (but uncoated) positive element - great for real close-up work at full tele. Just maybe the Sony lens is made by Tecpro?

tom.

Ignacio Rodriguez · February 2nd, 2004, 07:07 AM

Interesting, Tom. Does your Tecpro have low internal reflections? Perhaps this is a feature of having a concave front...

Tom Hardwick · February 2nd, 2004, 10:19 AM

You mean low flare levels? It's not bad, not bad at all. Of course I always hood it (Cavision 4:3) and try to keep the elements spotless.

Jan Roovers · February 2nd, 2004, 03:00 PM

Ignacio

Can you upload a demo of a picture made with this Sony lens.
I wish I could see it.

Alan Herr · March 2nd, 2004, 02:00 PM

I ordered a Tiffen .37mm lens for my PDX10 from B&H. I assume this doesn't pop on the front like the Lens protector hood (not lens cap) but rather screws in on the threads just beyond the circumference of the lens itself.???

Never bought a WA before.

Al

Tom Hardwick · March 5th, 2004, 03:37 PM

yes, it just screws into the zoom's filter threads. But Raynox do make what they call ''snap on'' w/a converters. I was suspicious untill I tried them - they hang on real tight and are so quick to mount/dismount. They look a bit ungainly though, as they have powerful opposing springs in housings set 180 degrees apart.

tom.

January 13th, 2004, 02:10 PM	#51
Jan Roovers Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Amsterdam NL -Turnhout BE Posts: 158	Please post a sampleshot of this convertor. The proof of the pudding is in the eating! __________________ ___________ Jan Roovers www.jtv.be

January 17th, 2004, 10:03 PM	#52
John Hartney Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Elgin, Illinois Posts: 206	Sorry Jan, I don't have any still ready to post and no free time to cull some, I've been very busy. If I'm able, I'll post some for you, but I've offered my opinion... I just shot a dueling knights sequence for Medival Times using it.... I use it in as a tool on paying productions on a regular basis without any complaints, only compliments. Best, John __________________ John Hartney Elgin, Illinois USA 847.742.9321

January 18th, 2004, 05:30 PM	#53
Neftali Cano New Boot Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: El Paso, Texas Posts: 23	Century WA HR65 I just purchased my first PDX10 and the Century WA convertor .65x along with it. I was very interested in the Canon WD58 as well, but went ahead and spent the extra $ for the Century lens. That said as soon as the camera comes in later this week I'll grab some images with the adapter on and off as well as 4x3 and 16x9 shots. __________________ NEF

February 1st, 2004, 09:16 PM	#54
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	Try used I found this used Sony branded WA adapter a few days ago. It is in bad shape, has some scratches on the front element and some dust on the inside, however these are not very visible when using the adapter and it is MUCH better than any WA adapter I have ever tried yet. Has very little chromatic abberation and focuses well across the whole field. No vignetting in 16x9 or 4x3. Very little internal reflections. Had to buy a 46mm to 47mm adapter ring. I bought it used for about US$20, plus about US$9 for the ring. The model is VCL-0746C. It's only x0.7... but it's good enough to leave on the camera for casual use. Pretty awesome. So my advice is, before commiting to spending big bucks at B&H, go shop around for used stuff, you might find things like this which can make a big difference for your images without leaving such a big hole in your wallet. The front element is strangely concave... I wonder if all the better WA adapters are like that. My previous one is not, at least not on the outside. Anybody knows who might have made this for Sony? __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.

February 2nd, 2004, 07:07 AM	#56
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	Interesting, Tom. Does your Tecpro have low internal reflections? Perhaps this is a feature of having a concave front... __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.

January 6th, 2004, 08:21 AM	#46
Chris Long Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Middletown, Maryland USA Posts: 177	Jan, I haven't done a great deal of shooting with it yet. The few minutes of tape that I've run through it have left me very pleased. Using still photos to judge the quality of the adapter is a fine thing to do, and must be the most accurate way of seeing how good it really is, I guess. I'm no expert, that's for sure. But for my purposes--non-professional, part-time, but nice-quality video--that method of judgement is probably more punitive than I need. So just by shooting some video, so far I'd say that it looks great! I'm extremely happy to have the extra field of view, and don't notice a tremendous amount of dropoff in resolution toward the edges. It's there, I'm know--I just don't think it's noticeable in the average video (not still) shot. Casual viewers don't actively look for that kind of thing, and it's hard to see anyway, as far as I can tell. So I like the Raynox very much. I like the little plastic case it comes in (better than the soft pouch my last adapter came with). I like the lens caps, especially the front one, which solves my problem of having the Sony cap flapping around. It fits in the Sony's hood well, though I had one problem: I couldn't get the adapter to fit into the wide hood without screwing it into the UV filter ring I had attached to the PDX lens. Maybe if I try harder, I can get it to work (I was perhaps a bit impatient to get it attached on Christmas morning hehe). But attached to the UV ring, it's fine. I like it a lot. It seems solid and well-built. I'll let you know more, if I manage to get more shot soon. Thanks for asking!

January 6th, 2004, 04:31 PM	#47
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	Tom Cavision have made several changes in their lens since your review. They are made in a different factory alltogether. I think ther're still Chinese though. Too bad OpTex don't make an adapter for the smaller lenses. I really like mine. It never comes off.

January 8th, 2004, 10:05 AM	#48
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	That's interesting Bryan. I guessed they would change the design of the 0.5X. But I thought they were made in Canada - or at least bought in from Japan. But China? What gives you this idea? tom.

January 9th, 2004, 09:43 PM	#49
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	The owner of Cavision and his wife (Catherine) came to Canada from China and set up businness in Vancouver, BC, Canada. All of the product that i've seen (matte boxes, boom poles etc) is manufactured in china and assembled in Canada. I have visited their office and bought my matte box last May . While I was ther I mentioned that several people had issues with the lense quality. Catherine mentioned that they had a new design and a new source from the orient. The new source could be Japan but I doubt it. Catherine and the salesman had mentioned the owner was in China keeping an eye on production. Everything I saw (non optical) looked to be of excellent quality. The owners of Cavision are very serious about a quality product. My opinion is the non optical stuff is damn good. if i want a lense i'll stay with the people that have a history in optical production.

January 13th, 2004, 10:24 AM	#50
John Hartney Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Elgin, Illinois Posts: 206	I'm using a Canon WD58 with a pdx10 to good results. Full zoom through with crisp, even image and very little distortion at focal length extreams. A 37>58mm ring is less than $7 at B&H. I always use the large battery on the camera and it maintains a fairly good balance, certainly workable. It holds up in 16:9 on projects alongside my Ikegami HL-DV7, clients are pleased, so am I. It's a great palmcorder and the Canon lens is a good compliment. Best, John

February 2nd, 2004, 06:46 AM	#55
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Yes, concave front elements are indeed unusual in wide-angle converters. I have a Tecpro 0.5s that has just such a front element. It's a two element design and the lens comes apart (unscrews) to leave behing a very powerful (but uncoated) positive element - great for real close-up work at full tele. Just maybe the Sony lens is made by Tecpro? tom.

February 2nd, 2004, 10:19 AM	#57
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	You mean low flare levels? It's not bad, not bad at all. Of course I always hood it (Cavision 4:3) and try to keep the elements spotless.

February 2nd, 2004, 03:00 PM	#58
Jan Roovers Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Amsterdam NL -Turnhout BE Posts: 158	Ignacio Can you upload a demo of a picture made with this Sony lens. I wish I could see it. __________________ ___________ Jan Roovers www.jtv.be

March 2nd, 2004, 02:00 PM	#59
Alan Herr Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 33	Did I get the right lens? I ordered a Tiffen .37mm lens for my PDX10 from B&H. I assume this doesn't pop on the front like the Lens protector hood (not lens cap) but rather screws in on the threads just beyond the circumference of the lens itself.??? Never bought a WA before. Al __________________ "Yes Mam, I know it is small but it has 3 CCD's." www.alchemyvideo.net

March 5th, 2004, 03:37 PM	#60
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	yes, it just screws into the zoom's filter threads. But Raynox do make what they call ''snap on'' w/a converters. I was suspicious untill I tried them - they hang on real tight and are so quick to mount/dismount. They look a bit ungainly though, as they have powerful opposing springs in housings set 180 degrees apart. tom.