Wide Angle Adapter for XHA1s

[Jase Tanner]

Which matte box are people using with it?

[Tom Hardwick]

Originally Posted by Will Mahoney

I use the WD-H72 exclusively.But no distortion.

Ah - not so Will. No denying the H72's good points but the very noticeable barrel distortion as you enter the building in that frenetic manner would not be acceptable to me. Any architectural photography requires the use on an aspheric lens if you want to go wider and you want straight lines to remain straight.

tom.

[Will Mahoney]

Tom,
I hear you and understand what you are talking about. I mostly shoot automotive install stuff and auto shows, not buildings.

Yes, I have noticed that on the extreme-wide end of the lens the tops of buildings (or anything "flat") will have a very noticable arch to it. So, yes, I guess that would be distortion.

But instead of distortion, since the lens is so badass, can we call it Sexy Distortion? As in, "yeah, you get some distortion, but it's really sexy." :)

UPDATE:
And "frenetic"...I guess that that word is appropriate. I WAS shooting handheld, walking across 150 yards of snow and ice, on an 8 deg. Ohio winter evening. :)

Will

[Tom Hardwick]

Originally Posted by Will Mahoney

So, yes, I guess that would be distortion. But instead of distortion, since the lens is so badass, can we call it Sexy Distortion? As in, "yeah, you get some distortion, but it's really sexy." :)

Nice try Will, but I'm not alongside you on this one. Barrel distortion is so common that I'd put it the other way around - the sexy beast is the rectilinear, the only one Krubrick would use in the Overland Hotel.

My Z1 barrel distorts most noticeably down the wide end and now that all my clients are viewing on LCDs or plasmas (that unlike CRTs are devoid of display distortions) the Z1's faults are all too noticeable.

But with my aspheric wide-angle in place I remove Sony's distortion at a stroke, though I do drop from a 12x zoom to a 7.8x zoom as it's not a full zoom-through. You pay your money and take your choice, and the fisheye effect does indeed have its place in movies. But it sure looks silly inside cathedrals and palaces.

tom.

[Colin McDonald]

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

Barrel distortion is so common ...

My wife says I'm beginning to suffer a bit from barrel distortion myself - and that's without the WA lens.

[Tom Hardwick]

You say it in jest I suspect Colin but your post has very real implications. Folk think that a barrel distorting lens 'curves buildings, telegraph poles, table tops etc'.

Of course it does all of these things, but it also barrel distorts the bride's figure, nothing's immune from its actions. When I follow (with super-wide in place) the girl as she swoops onto the dance floor I know she's not eaten for days to fit into that dress. She won't be thanking me for thickening her waist. Er - we're speaking photographically here folks.

tom.

[Colin McDonald]

Very good point, Tom. While I'm sure almost all of us would be wary of using WA lenses close to faces, barrel distortion is more insidious, and I've certainly seen the situation you describe.
My bete noir is incorrect display aspect ratios. To me it's so obvious, like playing an instrument out of tune, but so many people don't seem to notice at all. The number of stretched presenters appearing in hotel tvs is just unbelieveable. Drives me nuts!

[John Stakes]

safe to say the WD-H72 is the way to go. I however got the 16x9inc. at an AMAZING price so I went that route : )

JS