Yes, you're right about the coating and it seems to be single layer to me. Raynox obviously find it cheaper to put on a filter thread rather than multi-coat the glass, but this filter thread is really good in that it allows you to go fit a proper lens hood, and this is a miles better solution to lens flare than ever multi-coating is. If you can shade that front element from non-image forming light - you'll be all the better for it.

I make all my students put on a peaked cap as they look at me. The peak cuts out the overhead lighting and immediately improves my image (!) It's a great and simple way of demonstrating the simplicity and effectiveness of a lens hood.

tom.

Tom, that's certainly the most creative method I've heard yet with keeping one's students focused! I would use the feinting method: slow your actions, lower your voice, then WHAM! Blast something out. :)

I have the raxnox 6600pro attached to my pana 100 Pana GS100k and bought a Hakuba Roll out Rubber Hood...only 500yen...

Had a good day yesterday.....Strapped the Tripod to my Motorbike Helmet with Gaf Tape....Only one of those small Tripods mounted the Camera and went cruising down town Tokyo...

Lots of lookers at the wierd foriegner!!

The first time to use the wide angle and noticed quit a lot of flaring too!

I liked the sunny flaring however...kind of showed the heat of the day...

I havnt attached any filters to it yet and am lucky I didnt get any chips from teh traffic....I bought a Kenko UV Filter and havnt tried it yet......

Maybe that will cut down the flaring.....and save the lense from flying debri too!

Definatly can feel the 190gm of the Raynox 6600 weighing down the head of the cam....it even started pulling my helmet over my eyes....

Cheers,

Lincoln......very happy with my Raynox

Putting any filter on a wide angle adaptor can cause further problems, like vignetting.

Bill,

I'm dying to know all about the Xi. Please do post your findings! Much appreciated.
Regards,
Shawn

Raynox 6600 with filter attached.
 

I got the Raynox 6600 from B&H and use a Tiffen uv filter I ordered with it.

At 10x zoom a very slight shadow begins to form at the extream corners while filming in cinema mode with the uv filter attached.

I havn't seen any viginetting at all without the filter.

>For my purpose (shooting sports events mostly - indoors and outdoors) I think the less distortion the better. Since I'll mostly be close to the action high zoom is not so important

I started with the Raynoxx 6600 for my VX2000. For vtaping martial arts action footage in areas roughly the size of a two car garage. Zooming in for fight action at the far corner of the garage revealed the softening of the non-zoom through Raynox.
Switching to a Canon WD58H was a major improvement.

I see you are another fellow martial artist, Gints. A while back I discoved that slow shutters miss too much action and higher shutters steal too much light. So I shoot my "action" footage at 1/60th. How do you like to shoot fast kicks and punches?

So there I was, like a kid in a candy store. I'm talking about being at B & H in New York City last week. While there with some friends from Europe I finally decided to look at wide angle lenses for my DV953.

As I posted earlier in this thread, I wanted something that I could use on the live sports events that I work on. I told the B & H representative what I wanted and he suggested a Kenko SGW-05 "PRO" 0.5x - I was a little skeptical, but when I looked at it in the shop (they were very helpful) it seemed to be just the right thing. It is a solid lense that didn't add too much weight to the camera. I didn't want a fisheye effect and one of my colleagues suggested a .8 but in looking at it today in the hockey arena the 0.5x really does the job nicely for what I was looking for.

I have yet to really put it through it's paces or even look at it on a scope, but it seems like it was a good choice as everything I saw from my little test today seemed to be quite clear. No distortion from the naked eye and zooming was no problem. I was even able to keep the lense hood attached to the DV953 and could also remove it if I wanted... there didn't seem to be too much difference.

I think all in all it was a nice choice for the price which was under 80.00 US dollars. FYI, a stepdown ring (6.95) was necessary from 37mm to 43 mm for the DV953 although it did come with 3 stepping rings, 28-37mm, 30-37mm, 30.5-37mm, lense caps and pouch. Just one problem.... the back lense cap doesn't fit the step rings as it was just made for 37mm.

Or is that step up. I haven't read the earlier posts in this
thread. Are you saying the 953 has 43mm front threads?
I'm going to be taking a look at a Canon 0.7X 43mm
wide this weekend. I checked out the Canon 1.7X 43mm
tele briefly and it looked pretty good.

YES the DV953 has 43mm threads so I had to go from 37-43mm which is a small ring that screws on the wide angle adapeter then on either the DV953 lense hood or the lense itself without the lense hood that was supplied with the camera.

Step up... step down ... 220....221 whatever it takes. I just repeated what the B & H rep said and didn't think about it being up or down.

Let us know how the Canon is!

Now I understand. I know this has been discussed
before regarding is it "up" or "down". I believe stepdown is correct in the case of your 953.
Just got the Canon in. After I've taken a close look
at it I'll get back here about what I find.

Rick, and others, I just posted my review of the Canon
43mm 0.7X wide angle over at the "Open DV Discussion" thread.
Hope it helps.

Thanks, Dave. I saw that.

That 43mm is a pretty common front size, isn't it?