0.43x Wide Lens ???? at DVinfo.net

Carlos Manuel · June 16th, 2009, 04:41 PM

Hi all,

I've brought a very cheap wide lens for my Z1, a 0.43x.
I'm going to use it only once or twice, and I've decided not to spend a lot of money.

But seems to me that the 0.43x it's not real.
At least I expected a lot more of image on the frame.

Here is what I get - (without/with & indoor/outdoor)

What's your opinion - is this really a 0.43x ?
Or it's just marketing.

I need to do a real state video and I need more image in the indoors.

For example, the Sony VCL-HG0872 should "open" more or less than this?

Thanks.

Wacharapong Chiowanich · June 16th, 2009, 07:24 PM

Looking at the pics, I would say the lens is more like 0.7x-0.8x rather than 0.45x. Also, the image cover is certainly smaller than 0.72mm which is the diameter of the Z1/FX1's lens thread judging from the potholing in both wideangle pics. It is also possible you mounted the adapter on a stack of filter(s) which together were too thick making the distance from the rear element of the adapter and the front element of the camera's lens too long?

Try removing the filter(s), if any, if the potholing remains, buy a decent adapter. This one is next to useless.

Wacharapong

Terry Esslinger · June 17th, 2009, 01:55 PM

This is definately NOT a .43 converter. That would be almost if not a 'fish eye' lens. I think above comment is closer to the truth. Maybe .8.

Tom Hardwick · June 26th, 2009, 02:29 PM

It does look a bit iffy. It barrel distorts and vignettes and yet doesn't give you much more wide-angle. If you're doing any architectural work you'll want a wide-angle that controls the barrel distortion such as the Schneider UWL II, but the Sony 0.8x only gives a mild wide-angle increase.

tom.

June 16th, 2009, 04:41 PM	#1
Carlos Manuel Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 76	0.43x Wide Lens ???? Hi all, I've brought a very cheap wide lens for my Z1, a 0.43x. I'm going to use it only once or twice, and I've decided not to spend a lot of money. But seems to me that the 0.43x it's not real. At least I expected a lot more of image on the frame. Here is what I get - (without/with & indoor/outdoor) What's your opinion - is this really a 0.43x ? Or it's just marketing. I need to do a real state video and I need more image in the indoors. For example, the Sony VCL-HG0872 should "open" more or less than this? Thanks.

June 17th, 2009, 01:55 PM	#3
Terry Esslinger Major Player Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Sacramento, Elk Grove. Calif Posts: 306	This is definately NOT a .43 converter. That would be almost if not a 'fish eye' lens. I think above comment is closer to the truth. Maybe .8. __________________ Puttin the wet stuff on the red stuff!

June 16th, 2009, 07:24 PM	#2
Wacharapong Chiowanich Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Bangkok, Thailand Posts: 400	Looking at the pics, I would say the lens is more like 0.7x-0.8x rather than 0.45x. Also, the image cover is certainly smaller than 0.72mm which is the diameter of the Z1/FX1's lens thread judging from the potholing in both wideangle pics. It is also possible you mounted the adapter on a stack of filter(s) which together were too thick making the distance from the rear element of the adapter and the front element of the camera's lens too long? Try removing the filter(s), if any, if the potholing remains, buy a decent adapter. This one is next to useless. Wacharapong

June 26th, 2009, 02:29 PM	#4
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	It does look a bit iffy. It barrel distorts and vignettes and yet doesn't give you much more wide-angle. If you're doing any architectural work you'll want a wide-angle that controls the barrel distortion such as the Schneider UWL II, but the Sony 0.8x only gives a mild wide-angle increase. tom.