Wide angle lens side effects w dv852?
 

I'm looking for a wide angle lens for my dv852, I see Raynox and Kodak have them - the latter is only $50 http://www.adorama.com/IKKWA43.html
I didn't see the Tiffen 43mm models mentioned here on Tiff's site.

Q: i Does a WA adaptor affect OIS?
ii would this model Raynox http://www.digitaletc.com/go/item/9629
listed as 37mm with a 43 adaptor, work normally?

I'm considering 1/2 and 1/3 lenses, I want to get only 1 WA lens for all uses - mostly indoors. I don't need a pro quality setup, a lens good enough to be free of obvious distortion or aggravation is fine. Do I need another lens hood and protective glass ( like a UV filter ) as well?

Now that I can get the footage onto my Thinkpad I'm getting a lot more out of my cam! The video quality is better than I expected.

You can get the raynox HD-6600pro 0.6 WA lens for $99 at b and h, I just got one for my PV-DV953 and it works quite nicely, not sure about OIS/EIS issues, but the autofocus works quite well with it. It has a 72mm thread, I got a quantaray uv filter with microcoating for $30, even a basic glass one is around $25.... so it is sort of a tough decision... Mark

How wide?
 

Deciding how much WA I need - have you used .3x or .5x, and can one describe in words how wide that is? (describe picture in words... not easy!) On full wide, how much barrel distortion do you get with your .66 Raynox?

Hey Laurence,
There are some good pics of various WA lenses being used with Panasonic 3ccd camcorders over at www.pana3ccduser.com. I still am quite a newbie and don't think my descriptions will get you nearly as far as the actual examples. Mark

Laurence,

I am the one who posted the descriptions at the site Mark is referring to. Here is the link:

http://www.pana3ccduser.com/showthread.php?t=790

You will find pictures and a clip. That should give you a good idea of what to expect.

Generally speaking, the wider the lens, the more barrel distortion. For me personally, the barrel distortion in 0.5x is a bit too much. At 0.3x, it is almost a fisheye lens, i.e. a special effect lens.

The Raynox HD-6600PRO WA has been designed to reduce barrel distortion, and it does exactly that. If you look at the Canon WD-46 wide angle (or the WD-55) in the same thread, you will see that it has a little more barrel distortion. On the other hand, the Canons are sharper at full zoom. Can’t have everything!

My own Raynox HD-6600PRO is in the classifieds here, if you’re interested. ;-)

François

> My own Raynox HD-6600PRO is in the classifieds
> here, if you’re interested. ;-)

Why are you selling it? Stepping up to another one? TecPro maybe?

The reason I am selling is simply that I don’t use it much. With my GS400, I shoot all the time in 16:9 mode, which makes the image about 20% wider.

When I bought the Raynox at B&H in September, I also tried the latest Canon WD-43, which I had also found very good at the time. Since then I bought two older, used Canons on eBay, a WD-46 and a WD-55, at a lower price. The Canons show a little more barrel distortion, but are actually sharper.

So, since I don’t use a WA that often, I am keeping the Canon WD-55. I can live with its barrel distortion (which I consider "standard").

Some people shoot with a WA all the time, so it is perfectly legitimate for them to go with a lens that has less barrel distortion.

François

Thank You François. Because of my PDX10's limited WA, even in 16:9, when I am doing documentary work I crave for a better WA adapted that I can leave on. When I take off the WA I am currently using, I have to turn down sharpness and re-set exposure, which would be no problem for drama work but for documentary or ENG it just won't do, I miss the action when switching.

When you say the Raynox is softer, do you mean it is softer across the whole field of view or is it just softer at the edges? If it is slightly softer in the whole field than I can live with that. Actually sometimes a softer look can be desirable for more of a "film" look, but when the image is noticably softer at the edges than at the center, it gives resulting video a very cheap look.

Ignacio, it is mainly towards the edges.

if you take a look at the pics and clip at the link I posted above, you will have a good idea. Note, however, both the pics and clip are compressed. The "edge softness" will be obviously much less noticeable in AVI or MPEG. The Canons’ pics and clips were compressed the same for comparison purposes.

François

Hmmm. So in your opinion, for "always-on" use you would prefer the Canon WA adapters, even though they have more barrel distortion?

No, actually, it is quite the opposite. If I were shooting with a wide converter always on, I would keep the Raynox, specifically to have less barrel distortion.

But, as I said, since I don’t use the wide angle much, I do not care as much about barrel distortion. So I am keeping the Canon, which cost me less money.

François

Thank You François, great advice.