GL-2's WideAngle WD-58H - is it good?

Craig Peer · March 26th, 2003, 02:32 PM

By the way, if you are looking for a wide angle lens for a cam with 43mm threads, Canon makes one of those too ( a WD 43 of course ). I just bought one at B & H for my Optura 100 mc's.

Max Chau · March 27th, 2003, 11:35 PM

Guys,

I had a wd-58 for my gl-1 but when I upgrade to gl-2 I had a chance to compare it to Sony's vcl-hg0758 and I prefer the later for it is less distorted and the image looks prettier overall. (my wife like her photos from the Sony wa lens much much more). In direct comparason the Canon WD-58 produced images that just don't look right, especially noticable on people's face.)

The Sony is about $100 more , heavier and is less sharp than the Canon around the ring. But I bought it because, for me, the overall image quality more "beautiful".

I strongly encourage a comparason before you buy WD-58.

my 2 cents.

Devin Doyle · July 5th, 2003, 07:52 PM

Aaron, avoid the kenko .65x wide adapter at all costs! - unless you want a fisheye effect! I had one, but quickly got rid of it. I always keep my UV on and I thought that was pushing the adapter out too far and causing the fish eye - WRONG. Even with the adapter right on my GL1 I still had a fisheye. But if it was given to you then you've got nothing to lose. My 2 cents....

Tom Hardwick · March 16th, 2009, 08:50 AM

Strange as I have a 52 mm fit Kenko 0.65x as a partial zoom-through and I like it a lot. It's only single coated, but the barrel distortion isn't too bad and as a sinngle element it's sharp, compact, powerful and light.

tom.

Don Palomaki · March 17th, 2009, 03:52 PM

Partial zoom-through? How much and at what end of the zoom range.

I would expect a 52mm to vignette at wide settings if adapted to a 58mm thread.

Tom Hardwick · March 18th, 2009, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Palomaki

Partial zoom-through? How much and at what end of the zoom range. I would expect a 52mm to vignette at wide settings if adapted to a 58mm thread.

When you fit a single element wideangle adapter the camera has to enter its wideangle macro mode to be able to focus the image. So it depends on how powerful the macro focus is of your particular camera as to how far you can zoom before focus is lost.

Here's an example. The Z1 has a zoom scale shown in the v'finder that goes from 00 (full wide) to 99 (full tele). With my powerful single element wide-angle adapter in place the camera zooms from 00 to 65, so in this mode I still have a 7x zoom. Not bad for a 'non zoom-through' as they're generally known.

Don't let filter threads confuse you - they're just a designer's choice. The front element diameter and the lens' focal length are much more important considerations. The TRV900 for instance has a fairly big 52 mm filter thread surrounding a fairly small front element, and I could use a 43 mm wide-angle adapter with no vignetting.

tom.

Jarred Capellman · May 4th, 2009, 07:08 AM

I've had my WD58H on my GL2 since I got it last Fall and never taken it off, I attached a screen capture of a "final" shot from the film I am working on.

July 5th, 2003, 07:52 PM	#18
Devin Doyle Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 188	Aaron, avoid the kenko .65x wide adapter at all costs! - unless you want a fisheye effect! I had one, but quickly got rid of it. I always keep my UV on and I thought that was pushing the adapter out too far and causing the fish eye - WRONG. Even with the adapter right on my GL1 I still had a fisheye. But if it was given to you then you've got nothing to lose. My 2 cents.... __________________ http://devin.par-t-com.net

March 17th, 2009, 03:52 PM	#20
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,487	Partial zoom-through? How much and at what end of the zoom range. I would expect a 52mm to vignette at wide settings if adapted to a 58mm thread. __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

May 4th, 2009, 07:08 AM	#22
Jarred Capellman Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Maryland Posts: 68	I've had my WD58H on my GL2 since I got it last Fall and never taken it off, I attached a screen capture of a "final" shot from the film I am working on. Attached Thumbnails __________________ Motion Blur Studios - Canon XL H1, XL2, nanoFlash, 2xFS-4 HDs, Custom 9TB RAID 10 Array HPT RocketRaid 4320, GeForce GTX 480, Adobe CS5 Production Suite

March 26th, 2003, 02:32 PM	#16
Craig Peer Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 72	By the way, if you are looking for a wide angle lens for a cam with 43mm threads, Canon makes one of those too ( a WD 43 of course ). I just bought one at B & H for my Optura 100 mc's.

March 27th, 2003, 11:35 PM	#17
Max Chau New Boot Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 6	Guys, I had a wd-58 for my gl-1 but when I upgrade to gl-2 I had a chance to compare it to Sony's vcl-hg0758 and I prefer the later for it is less distorted and the image looks prettier overall. (my wife like her photos from the Sony wa lens much much more). In direct comparason the Canon WD-58 produced images that just don't look right, especially noticable on people's face.) The Sony is about $100 more , heavier and is less sharp than the Canon around the ring. But I bought it because, for me, the overall image quality more "beautiful". I strongly encourage a comparason before you buy WD-58. my 2 cents.

March 16th, 2009, 08:50 AM	#19
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Strange as I have a 52 mm fit Kenko 0.65x as a partial zoom-through and I like it a lot. It's only single coated, but the barrel distortion isn't too bad and as a sinngle element it's sharp, compact, powerful and light. tom.