Tiffen 0.56x lens + PDX10 lenshood compatible?

[Ralf Strandell]

Hi,

1) Does the Tiffen MegaPlus 0.56x wideangle lens fit in the Sony PDX-10 wideangle hood?

2) Tiffen MegaPlus series lenses = Tiffen digital series lenses?

3) Would you please recommend some good online shop where one can get the Tiffen lenses.

Thanks

[Frank Granovski]

I don't know about the hood, but you can always buy another hood. B+W makes wide angle rubber hoods. In the 37mm thread size, the Raynox HD5000 is also very good. Have you tried checking with EVS or B&H?

[Gareth Watkins]

Can vouch for the quality of the Techpro 0.5 wide angle lens for the PDX10 / TRV950...

Sharp, zoom through, and has 49mm thread for Vu filter of lens hood.

I'm tending to leave it on all the time as wide end is more important that ultimate zoom, and approx. 250mm max zoom seems enough for most needs....

I got mine over the net from Creative Video in the UK.


Cheers
Gareth

[Boyd Ostroff]

I haven't seen the tiffen lens, but the wide hood is pretty roomy. It works with both my .45x Titanium wide lens or 2x Sony high grade telephoto (tight fit on this, but it does work). But since the wide hood doesn't have a cover you must use the plastic snap on cover that comes with these other lenses, and that works but is a pretty tight fit to get your fingers in there....

[Ralf Strandell]

The Tiffen lens does not fit in the wideangle hood of the PDX-10. A quick test also showed that a lens hood is needed. Must get...

The W/A lens is quite sharp but it's not completely zoom-through :(

[Ralf Strandell]

Now tell me what wideangle lens is better than the (usable) Tiffen 0.56x/37mm thread lens. It could be a 37mm lens or any bigger lens...

Is there any W/A lens for under $700 that

1) is focused and sharp corner-to-corner at all apertures and focal lengths (1x ... 12x zoom, PDX10)

2) does not affect the colors of the picture

3) is properly multicoated to avoid unwanted reflections and light loss

4) has at least 0.7x "power"

Aspherical lenses (to figth distortions) would be good too...

Links to independent tests would be appreciated.

[Frank Granovski]

Why not replace the hood?

Those 2 wides are the best ones I know of in this thread size. One local test put the Tiffen on top but the Raynox HD5000 was never tested. The Raynox and others have been tested here by Tom Hardwick and others. Tom does tests and writes for a UK cam magazine.

There are other 37mm wides, but I doubt you will ever find the perfect camcorder wide angle adaptor. There aren't any.

[Ralf Strandell]

"Why not replace the hood?"

Well, because I would need to use ND-filters and probably contrast filters too - especially in scenes where a W/A is required. I would need one hood for the standard lens, one for the W/A and one for the W/A with the larger filters. It would be easier to fit everything within one single hood. On the other hand this seems to be impossible now, so there is no need to stay in 37mm thread size anymore. A larger lens would add weight to the camera, too, which is great. I can use all the weight I can add there (stability...).

The Tiffen seems to be pretty good. It is not a zoom through, though, and I do not know for what focal lengths it has been designed. Can I use it with up to 6x zoom? 8x? Where does it start to affect the sharpness? At 4x maybe? This uncertainness is unwanted. Maybe I need to do some tests that the lens manufacturer really should have done & publicized... I can learn to live with it but it certainly has some unwanted limitations.

And yes, sometimes I do need to zoom into details even when using a W/A adapter. I'm in the crowd - I need the W/A - next I zoom to distance (some detail) - can't switch lenses without a noticeable jump or delay, so I keep the W/A - the image gets blurred...

The Tiffen 0.56x might be the best of the 37mm size adapters (if you say so), but since it does not fit in the wide angle hood anyway then there is no need to stay in the 37mm size. I could get just any thread size (with step up ring); 52mm, 58mm... Only the picture quality and the availability of filters (ND,contrast) and hoods matter. A larger lens would also allow the use of filters without a step up ring. I would only need one W/A hood then...

(I should have got the Canon with the changeable lenses, but it's big and heavy and obtrusive and expensive... - and what about 16:9?)

So, are there *any* large W/A lenses that are better with PDX10 than these 37mm ones? Which ones? Canon WD-58?

[Michael Brumback Jr.]

I use the .65x Century Optics wide angle
http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/65xhr_wa/65xhr_37mm.htm

it fits just fine into the rubber hood and looks a lot better than if you had it screwed on without the hood. the hood also blocks some stray light at certain angles and protects the lens from bumps. It also has a threaded end for filters such as an ND or UV, when you stack 2 or more, it is so wide you can see the edge of the filter, but since it is full zoom through, you can zoom in a bit and get past the filter edge.

not having zoom through to me would be really bad, because it would require constant removal of the lens and that's not something I want to do all the time because 200$ isn't chump change to me. one drop is all it takes.

no step up rings are needed for the PDX10 and it accepts standard 62mm filters. I use all Tiffen 62mm filters on it. it's easy to get in and out if you want to do some telephoto work also.

and again, it looks nice with it in the hood, as if it's part of the original camera. a 65mm opening in the front with a big piece of glass gives the camera a bit less of the consumer look, even though the camera is so small.

mJR

[Frank Granovski]

One think to keep in mind is when using a filter, and 2 for sure, on a wide angle adaptor, you are going to get vignetting and other unpleaseant surprises. This is why a lot of wide angle adaptors don't come with front filter threads. If the threads are there, it's meant more to screw on a lens hood. B+H make wide angle lens hoods.

[Michael Brumback Jr.]

I haven't seen any curvature of the image when using multiple filtes, really you shouldn't see anything even with a stack of filters. With the century you see some fisheye at it's widest angle, which can be hiden if the shot is say of the out doors or objects that have straigh lines not near the edge of the frame, but you can just zoom in a bit and it goes away. but as far as stacking filters I haven't noticed a change in anything.

I'm no optical expert, although a good friend is and I do their web page. http://www.kreischer.com/ (I hope soon to talk to him about helping design a prime lens adapter for the PDX10, need to know the math to figure out the lense distances and such)

but a filter is just a filter and doesn't have a curve or anything other than it's acutally thickness to curve the light at all. I'm not sure what how thick is to thick before it bends the light, but most filters are extremely thin and then their is space between them.

I have used 2 filters on the Century, say a .3 and .9 ND and didn't see anything in the image.

the only thing I saw was when stacking filters, that the distance of the angle will change because you are placing a large space between the glass and the last filter's frame. so you loose the wider angle because you pick up the filter frames

the B+W filter hoods are great, I use those in extreme lighting, they have short wide ones, long thinner ones, but depending on the angle you may be the actual hood in the shot.

mJR

[Frank Granovski]

Dr Peter Utz writes:

Less is better. Although you can stack filters, combining their effects, the added glass increases distortion, decreases brightness, contrast, and edge sharpness in your picture. The multilayers of glass may combine to create faint rainbows or Newton's Rings, and nets and star filters may combine to create moire, faint bands or shadowy dots across the picture. Use the fewest filters possible. Also don't forget that your camera may be adding its own filter to the equation.

Read more of Peter's articles here:

http://videoexpert.home.att.net/