Wide Angle Adapter for XHA1s at DVinfo.net

Alex DeJesus · September 5th, 2009, 05:34 PM

I know there is another thread about this, but there are too many unrelated comments. Century Optics is one choice. How many other adapters are available? User feedback please.

Thanks

Janson Williams · September 5th, 2009, 11:54 PM

just get century optics, i love my fish from them and am about to purchase a wide angle as well, bayonet mount is awesome!

David W. Jones · September 6th, 2009, 05:49 AM

I use the Canon. The quality is good and the lens is a zoom through.

Colin McDonald · September 6th, 2009, 07:47 AM

Canon for me too but that's probably what caused my hernia.

Alex DeJesus · September 6th, 2009, 08:24 AM

The lens on the XHA1s is not removable. do you think I meant the XLH1s?

David W. Jones · September 6th, 2009, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex DeJesus

The lens on the XHA1s is not removable. do you think I meant the XLH1s?

No, the XH-A1 with the WD-H72 wide angle lens adapter.

Colin McDonald · September 7th, 2009, 09:27 AM

This is all getting a bit surreal for me. I ignored Jason's bayonet just like I ignored his fish. Please don't make me laugh - it hurts. Someone please do a quick summary on the usual WA adaptors and whether they are zoom through or not.

Michael Ojjeh · September 7th, 2009, 10:51 AM

I have the 16X9 0.7x wide angle converter that works with my H1 and A1. It works fine but it is soft on the edges.
16x9 Inc. | 169-HD7X-72 0.7x Wide Angle Converter | 169-HD7X-72

Alex DeJesus · September 7th, 2009, 10:59 AM

Anyone try the 16x9-HD7X-72 from 16x9, Inc.? That's the mfg. name. It weighs 19.2 ooz.

Adorama lists the WD-H72 at 2.3 pounds. Talk about a hernia! Is that correct? Are there any other choices besides the Canon and Century Optics and the the one above?

Battle Vaughan · September 7th, 2009, 11:18 AM

Yes, we tried the Century optics, orginally bought for a Sony Z1U, on the Canon. The Canon converter is matched to the XHa1 and was sharper on the edges. It is a quality piece of glass, although (as our colleagues point out) it is heavy. IMHO a bargain, however, for the price and quality. I put it on my XHA1 and never took it off..../Battle Vaughan

Jonathan Shaw · September 8th, 2009, 05:54 PM

Yep Canon for me too, produces get sharp images

Will Mahoney · September 9th, 2009, 09:33 AM

I use the WD-H72 exclusively. This lens is great, and just like Battle mentioned, I never take mine off of the camera. It is completely zoom-through and really doesn't take away any of my "reach" on the long end of the lens.

I shoot mostly automotive stuff, and the WD-H72 allows me to get ridiculously close to my subject matter (for extreme angles) and still be in crisp focus. I've accidentally bumped the edge of the lens (not the hood, the lens) into things I can be so close. Very nice.

A few examples (shot on XH-A1 w/ WD-H72):
2009 International Motorcycle Show - Cleveland, OH
2009 International Cycle Show - Cleveland, OH By Will Mahoney On ExposureRoom

2009 Cleveland International Auto Show:
2009 Cleveland Auto Show By Will Mahoney On ExposureRoom

Also, yes, this bad boy is heavy. I'm not kidding when I say that it feels like this lens doubled the weight of the camera. But no distortion, completely zoom-through, and the weight might assist in stabilizing the camera (which was not the case for the opening shot of the above cycle video... :( It took me forever to stabilize it in post, by hand.)

Cheers.

Christopher Neville · September 10th, 2009, 07:20 AM

I have to agree with Will, the WD-H72 is great and I don't take it off my camera. I've been really pleased with the results it has given me. It is a bit heavy though.

Hubert Duijzer · September 10th, 2009, 02:24 PM

Another vote for the WD-H72. It sure is heavy, but the worst thing is, it makes the cam really Front heavy.
The good thing is, in combination with the A1's 20x zoom it will go from wide to decent close in a second or so. Ideal for weddings or every other fast live event.

Jonathan Shaw · September 11th, 2009, 08:38 PM

Only drawback of using it is that is a little harder to get a shallow depth of field at the long end of the lens.

September 5th, 2009, 05:34 PM	#1
Alex DeJesus Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Henderson, NV Posts: 177	Wide Angle Adapter for XHA1s I know there is another thread about this, but there are too many unrelated comments. Century Optics is one choice. How many other adapters are available? User feedback please. Thanks

September 5th, 2009, 11:54 PM	#2
Janson Williams Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 101	just get century optics, i love my fish from them and am about to purchase a wide angle as well, bayonet mount is awesome! Last edited by Janson Williams; September 6th, 2009 at 12:59 AM.

September 6th, 2009, 08:24 AM	#5
Alex DeJesus Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Henderson, NV Posts: 177	Bayonet Mount? For XHA1s? The lens on the XHA1s is not removable. do you think I meant the XLH1s?

September 7th, 2009, 10:51 AM	#8
Michael Ojjeh Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 338	I have the 16X9 0.7x wide angle converter that works with my H1 and A1. It works fine but it is soft on the edges. 16x9 Inc. \| 169-HD7X-72 0.7x Wide Angle Converter \| 169-HD7X-72 __________________ Dragonfly Production http://www.dragonflyproduction.net/ http://www.vimeo.com/user432181

September 7th, 2009, 10:59 AM	#9
Alex DeJesus Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Henderson, NV Posts: 177	Heavy Weight? Anyone try the 16x9-HD7X-72 from 16x9, Inc.? That's the mfg. name. It weighs 19.2 ooz. Adorama lists the WD-H72 at 2.3 pounds. Talk about a hernia! Is that correct? Are there any other choices besides the Canon and Century Optics and the the one above? Last edited by Alex DeJesus; September 7th, 2009 at 11:06 AM. Reason: More info

September 6th, 2009, 05:49 AM	#3
David W. Jones Trustee Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Little Rock Posts: 1,383	I use the Canon. The quality is good and the lens is a zoom through.

September 6th, 2009, 07:47 AM	#4
Colin McDonald Trustee Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Glasgow, Scotland Posts: 1,546	Canon for me too but that's probably what caused my hernia.

September 7th, 2009, 09:27 AM	#7
Colin McDonald Trustee Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Glasgow, Scotland Posts: 1,546	This is all getting a bit surreal for me. I ignored Jason's bayonet just like I ignored his fish. Please don't make me laugh - it hurts. Someone please do a quick summary on the usual WA adaptors and whether they are zoom through or not.

September 7th, 2009, 11:18 AM	#10
Battle Vaughan Trustee Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Miami, FL USA Posts: 1,505	Yes, we tried the Century optics, orginally bought for a Sony Z1U, on the Canon. The Canon converter is matched to the XHa1 and was sharper on the edges. It is a quality piece of glass, although (as our colleagues point out) it is heavy. IMHO a bargain, however, for the price and quality. I put it on my XHA1 and never took it off..../Battle Vaughan

September 8th, 2009, 05:54 PM	#11
Jonathan Shaw Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 552	Yep Canon for me too, produces get sharp images __________________ www.ginclearfilm.com www.facebook.com/ginclearfilm

September 9th, 2009, 09:33 AM	#12
Will Mahoney Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 259	I use the WD-H72 exclusively. This lens is great, and just like Battle mentioned, I never take mine off of the camera. It is completely zoom-through and really doesn't take away any of my "reach" on the long end of the lens. I shoot mostly automotive stuff, and the WD-H72 allows me to get ridiculously close to my subject matter (for extreme angles) and still be in crisp focus. I've accidentally bumped the edge of the lens (not the hood, the lens) into things I can be so close. Very nice. A few examples (shot on XH-A1 w/ WD-H72): 2009 International Motorcycle Show - Cleveland, OH 2009 International Cycle Show - Cleveland, OH By Will Mahoney On ExposureRoom 2009 Cleveland International Auto Show: 2009 Cleveland Auto Show By Will Mahoney On ExposureRoom Also, yes, this bad boy is heavy. I'm not kidding when I say that it feels like this lens doubled the weight of the camera. But no distortion, completely zoom-through, and the weight might assist in stabilizing the camera (which was not the case for the opening shot of the above cycle video... :( It took me forever to stabilize it in post, by hand.) Cheers. __________________ http://exposureroom.com/members/WillMahoney.aspx/ www.youtube.com/truckaccessories

September 10th, 2009, 07:20 AM	#13
Christopher Neville Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Rock Hill, S.C. Posts: 57	Happy with the WD-H72 I have to agree with Will, the WD-H72 is great and I don't take it off my camera. I've been really pleased with the results it has given me. It is a bit heavy though. __________________ http://finalsignal.net/ http://exposureroom.com/members/finalsignal.aspx/

September 10th, 2009, 02:24 PM	#14
Hubert Duijzer Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Netherlands Posts: 177	Another vote for the WD-H72. It sure is heavy, but the worst thing is, it makes the cam really Front heavy. The good thing is, in combination with the A1's 20x zoom it will go from wide to decent close in a second or so. Ideal for weddings or every other fast live event.

September 11th, 2009, 08:38 PM	#15
Jonathan Shaw Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 552	Only drawback of using it is that is a little harder to get a shallow depth of field at the long end of the lens. __________________ www.ginclearfilm.com www.facebook.com/ginclearfilm