I see your point. Nevertheless, I have succesfully used a polarizer between the adapter and camera. The footage looked good. There may have been distortion but I couldn't see it.

Of all the wide-angle converters I've tested on the VX2k, the only one I'd tell you to avoid is the Cavision 0.5x. This gives quite unacceptable image blurring at the edges whatever aperture is used and on top of that it vignettes the frame in all four corners.

The Century 0.65x with its breech-lock bayonet is a beauty (as it should be at the price) though it distorts too much for such an expensive optic in my view. The Tecpro 0.5x I'm testing at the moment is quite remarkable. It's every bit as sharp at all apertures and focal lengths as the Century, but is just over a quarter the price. It's not as nicely coated so needs careful hooding, but it comes in PD150 colour - so guess where it's aimed?

It has a very concave front element and the lens unscrews to leave behing a verty powerful (and rather distorting) +8ish diopter close-up lens. Worth a look I'd say. Distorts straight lines yes - but then it's a very powerful 0.5x widie.

tom.

Haven't used the Canon, but I have the Sony and am pleased. I did some shots of a test chart with and without the adaptor and couldn't notice any difference in focus or distortion. Have never noticed a zoom or vignetting problem either, although I can't claim to have scientifically analyzed it. But the other comments about lack of threads, etc are true.

My 2 cents.I know Ihave far less shooting experience then most here but i own the Canon for my VX2k with the lens hood and i would have to agree with the other Canon owners.A great lens for the money. i have noticed no difference in image with or without the lens as far as focus etc is concerned.i do know the lens hood makes a huge difference as far as lens flare goes as it should so I would recommend that plus it may help some it protecting the lens.
Optex also makes a high quality .65 bayonet mount available from www.zgc.com.

I have the Canon WD-58. Great lens for the money. Just got the new Canon Lens Shade. Works excellent and looks PRO!!

I just got the Sony for $201.00. Works great, a bit large but thats not a problem. Anyone know if there is a lense shade for this monster?

Regarding a lens shade, here's a re-print of something I posted awhile ago...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Poor man's wide angle lens shade

I've been using a Sony .7x wide adaptor on my VX-2000 for awhile and have generally been happy, but have wanted some sort of lens shade to use with. Not ready to pony up hundreds of $$$ on a matte box (yet :-), I came across a simple, durable, inexpensive solution that might interest others.

At my local Ace Hardware I bought a rubber pipe reducing coupling. This is a heavy black rubber fitting that uses hose clamps to join two different sized PVC or iron drain pipes. The 3" to 4" adaptor was just about the right diameter for the Sony .7x lens. I cut some excess rubber off the 3" end with a utility knife and made some small slits so it would fit over the lens more easily, then used the supplied hose clamp to attach it to the lens. After mounting on the lens I observed the amount of vignetting, then trimmed the excess rubber from the 4" end.

The result was something that looked much more like a piece of photographic equipment than a sewer pipe connection, and it works perfectly. Total cost was about $5.00 and it took maybe 15 minutes. Take a look in the plumbing section at your local hardware - the model I bought is the 3" to 4" adaptor #PCX 56-43.

Boyd certainly gets the design award for his "plumber's helper," but if Edward has a bit of mad money, he might contact Cavision for a professional lens shade for his Sony. Well made product for around $100.00. This will also provide protection for the lens, and makes a very professional appearance for your PD150. www.cavision.com.
Another less expensive add on is the Flarebuster. This is a "french flag" device that was designed for still camera use, but is even more helpful on a video camera. They include the flag, but its the mount you are after, then you will probably want to make your own flag out of black foamcore from any art store. The Flarebuster costs about $25.00 and is the real deal. You will find other uses for the Flarebuster, such as using it as a handy prompter. Clip on notes on a 3x5 card and twist it to face the talent. www.flarebuster.com.

Couple of other notes. The Sony does not have filter threads, but where do you find 4" screw in filters? Any additional glass added to the front of this large front element will be problematic. Unless you add a very serious matte box.

The Sony is very sharp and barrel distortion is minimal. The problem is that large front element, along with the price. But it is quality glass. I would like to know where Frank G. got his information that it is manufactured by Kenko.

The Canon is a good deal for the price, but it does go a bit soft at the longer focal lengths.

Whichever one you choose, a wide angle lens should be one of the first optional purchases for the VX2K and the PD150.

Wayne, I was just looking on the cavision website. Exactly which model sunshade works with the Sony lens? There don't appear to be any prices on the site either.

Yeah, Boyd, here is the link to the sunshade. http://www.cavision.com/LensHood/LH100w.htm
I believe they also have a model that has a filter slot, if you are interested. I would suggest you call John Anthony at Cavision direct at 604-681-6621 and ask him for a price quote in U.S. dollars with shipping, so you won't be surprised. Ask him if it includes the soft cover. Not a big deal.

Hood for Kenko 0.65 Pro Wide Angle lens
 

Can anyone suggest an affordable but effective hood for the 82mm diameter Kenko wide angle lens? And on the same topic is it OK to use a UV filter in front of it for extra protection or will it degraded the picture quality? Thanks all. Fernando

I thought I had commented on this post already. Maybe I didn't hit submit.

The Lee Wide Angle lens shade comes with none, one or two 4x4" filter slots and costs $220 to $230 US
You will also need a Lee 82 mm Adapter ring which is around $68-$70 US. The unit is kinda smurfy, kinda like a matt box.

http://leefiltersusa.com/PDFs/Camera/CamPdfIndex.html

Century 0.55x Wide Angle lens
 

I'm curious to know who else owns this lens, and what they are using it for? It seems to be a less popular lens, but I prefer it many times over 0.65x. I still get about 3/4 of the zoom range, and it only distorts at the widest point. I just finished a small film shot with the VX2000 and the Century 0.55x lens. Once we are done color correcting it, I'll post some shots of this great lens. Pick it up for $229 at www.tristatecamera.com

Filter attachments for the Century Optics Wide Angle & 2X Tele Lenses
 

Hello everyone,
I'm about to purchase my PD 150 and a few lenses and was wondering if it's possible to put a filter on those Century Optics lenses instead of going with the large Century Optics Sunshade with the large square filters. Its seem a bit bulky to me. Any ideas? If so how much and where? Thanks for your time on this,
Todd

The Century 0.65x bayonet-on wide-angle has no filter threads - probably to stop you fitting filters and vignetting the full (uncropped) frame. The Cavision hoods work well with this lens though.

tom.

Todd, the Kenko Pro adaptor comes with filter threads. Before buying any adaptor, take your cam down to a shop, and shoot some test footage with both adaptors. Also what Tom says is correct. Most if not all wide angles with a filter screwed on will most likely cause vignetting.

I put about a half hour worth of info on your cross post over at dv.com. The links will keep you busy most of the evening.

Optex .65x Wide Angle
 

ZGC has this lense listed for $299 and sunshade for $95. Anyone know if this can be bought for less anywhere?

Make sure you know which version of the lens the price refers to Charles. Optex do a 0.65x with a 58mm attachment thread as well as the far nicer breech-lock bayonet. Both have the same optics, but one is a lot dearer than the other.

tom.

Its refers to it as a bayonet mount. Is this the correct one.
Thanks for the reply.
cf

I believe ZGC is the only place to get this lens in the USA but i could be totally wrong. I have emailed them about the lens and t hey could only say good things about its build and optic quality. Send them an email they are more than willing to answer any of your questions. But for the money you cant beat the canon WD-58 with the lens hood just my opinion.

ZGC is, indeed, the only place in the US to get this lens. I wanted one last fall, and ZGC was temporarily out. I even went so far as to contact Optex in Britain. They could sell it to me and ship to the US, but the cost would have been slightly more than ZGC's price. I wound up waiting 'til ZGC got one in stock (I got the bayonet mount).

It's a nice lens, but be very careful about screwing in filters in the front. I used a standard UV filter and got vignetting (which DIDN'T show either in the viewfinder or the LCD screen of my VX2000, but DID show up when I went to edit). I have a "slim line" polarizer which I haven't tried yet, but I'm going to try to find a "slim line" UV filter and see how that works.

I didn't know there was a sun shade for it. How big is it? Does it just screw in the front?

I just bought the Optex .65 sony bayonet from Kingsway Motion Picture. They are the Canadian distributor. It was $500 Canadian.

ZGC is the distributor in the US. and do sell it for $298, I really do think that's as good a price as you'll get. By the time I paid shipping and brokerage it amounts to the same thing or within pennies.

Looks like a nice piece of glass with coatings on the rear elements. The tech claims all elements are coated. I'll have to play a bit tomorrow.

http://www.kingswaycanada.com/

Paul
They do show a shade but your better off buying a Cavision a chunk of change cheaper.
www.cavision.com

Paul, could you confirm the method of locking the lens. I aligh the slots with the red dot up. I turn the ring in the direction of the arrow (clockwise facing) and then turn the lens clockwise until tight.

If you could email me at bbeasleigh@rogers.com

I'm in the process of deciding on a matte box for the pig now.

Ive looked at the Chrosziel 4x4 and 3x3 DV hoods, the Cavisions, Lee's and the Century carbon Fibre.

The Century and Chrosziel are both a thing of beauty.
Anyone have any input here?

So which shade works on the Optex? French flag or super wide angle? or other

http://www.cavision.com/LensHood/LH100S.htm

The Rubber Sunshade for Internal Focal Lens:
Model number: LH-100M / P is suggested for .5 to .65 WA adapters.It doesn't mention the optex but remember the optex is the same as the centuiry .65.

The rubber hood comes with a (ABS) plastic (LH-100P) or metal (LH-100M) backmount.(clamp mount) It fits a 100mm barrel so it need a 100 to 85 stepping ring


http://www.cavision.com/french_flag_for_3x3.htm
The French Flag is just a very large elephant's ear that one clips on the top of the shade to prevent lens flare.

I have the price list on a word doc if you want a copy email me at bbeasleigh@nospamrogers.com.

The MBF3 french flag is $39 US
The LH-100M is $99 US
The LH-100P is $59 US
An ARP485 stepping ring from 100 to 85mm is $5
A cover is available for $10. if you have the french Flag it justs folds over and becomes a lens ahade cover.

Do you guys leave your wide angle lense on most of the time? I know zilch but am trying to learn. What is the advantages or disadvantages of leaving lense on?

Do you have any reason to take it off? seems like a sound criteria to me. If I'm using the wide to short telephoto, i'd leave it on. There's rarely an instance that I would use the long telephoto, so it's going to stay on.

Playing around with the optex I've noticed that a thin stepping ring or a thin protective filter would be in order. That front end is all glass

I hardly ever remove my WA lens from the VX2k.

Charles - advantages of leaving the wide-angle converter on all the time (and we'll assume a zoom through optic here, ok?)

1) Much more useful range of focal lengths in my view.
2) Easier to get in close and get even better sound tracks.
3) Less visible camera shake, easier tracking movements etc.
4) Less focusing worries. Can be locked down more often with less mistakes.
5) Wide-angle perspective control offered.
6) Less hose-pipeing of the scenery, and one shot gets-it-all-in.


And the disadvantages?

1) Probably three extra elements added to the lens line up. That's six extra surfaces all of which are not centred correctly as they rely on the thread or the bayonet. This means more flare, more distortion, less sharpness.

2). Added weight on the front of the camera.

3) Loss of differential focus because max tele is so reduced.

4) Inability to add filters for fear of vignetting.

Me? I use mine nearly all the time. Panasonic know this and their DVX100 has a much more wide-angle zoom fitted as standard - the same as having the VX2k with a 0.7x widie fitted.

tom.

I leave mine on almost all the time as well. However, I noticed that, on my VX2000, optical steady shot seems less effective with the lens on than off.

Paul - are you serious? You say optical steady shot seems less effective with the lens on than off. Oh - I've re-read it - you think the SSSS is still effective with a wide-angle in place but not as effective as when used on the standard zoom, is that it?

Well, try this test. Zoom to wide angle with SSSS turned on. Gently wave the camera about and note the steadying effect. Now attach the wide-angle converter and zoom up to the same focal length, so the viewfinder shows the same image as before. Gently shake the camera. Do you see any difference in the power or effectiveness of the SSSS? I don't.

tom.

I know it doesn't sound right, but that's been my experience. Both at full-wide, and at tele, steady shot seems more effective without the wide angle lens in place. I can't think of any reason why this should be so, but it was quite apparent in the video. My shots were steadier without the wide angle lens, than with.

I was doing shots in which I would follow my subjects along, walking behind and hand-holding the camera. Steady shot was more effective at full-wide without the wide angle lens that with it.

The other thing I did was shot at fairly extreme tele, from a seated position with my arms braced. My tele shots without the wide angle lens were much steadier than with.

Paul
With the optex on the VX2K is a hefty pig.
What kind of brace if any do you use and what do you use as a filter holder.

I also wondered how far you cinch up on the bayonet mount when tightening it.
Thanks
Bryan

I believe the owners manual to VX2k states that a WA lens attachment may reduce the steadyshot effectiveness.

I am thinking of the Optex for my PD150. Has anyone tried both the Optex and Century side-by-side? Is one shaper than the other or is there no real difference other than $100?

Will Boggs

I really doubt that by doing a simple A/B test anyone could see any difference. If there is a difference it will be something subtle that'll be noticed in time. The front and rear elements are very well coated and the lens construction is excellent. (I'm picky)

I am picky too. I have bought a few Optex gizmos over the years and like their work. The machining is always top notch. But, Century has become the "d'facto standard" in the relm of lens adaptors. I guess I can always get the Optex .65 and run a few tests and keep it if it is what works.

Will Boggs

VX9000
 

I do have Sony VX9000 Camcorder DV with 52mm lens. Can somebody help me with wide lens I need to by? I found one on E-bay for aprox. USD 60. Model SONY VCL-R0752. Do you think it will fit and work on my camcorder?
Have about dark corners and focus?
Thanks

Ok I'm buying the optex today. Does anyone have suggestion on a uv or polorizer I should get. I read something about vignetting occurring using a polorizer. Also whats the cost on the cavision sunshade.