Sony VCL-EX0877 0.8X wide angle lens
 

Im considering buying the Sony wide angle lens for the EX but Im not sure whether Century optics are going to release or have released one that is better than the Sony. If anyone has any information or recommendations on whether to buy or wait I'd be much obliged.

peace out, kubalsky

Imho...
 

I am very glad I waited for confirmation that the Z1 Century Wangle was waiting for. One of my Z1s wears it for hours at a time, but it's a fussy lens that doesn't accept filters or matte boxes easily, needs constant cleaning. It's not quite W-I-D-E but it's not $20k. I'm happy, but a little part of me says my colleague with a Sony Wangle hasn't received complaints.

As for the EX1 lenses... Hmmmm.....

Their EX1 x0.75 version is very new, quite pricey. As the EX1's lens already does some distorts at its widest setting, I'd buy this lens only if it can correct them but still retain quality at zoom-through.

At this level of lens, you'd want to be 'wearing' it for a lot of shooting, and so it had better be very very good (especially at the price point).

Otherwise I'm looking at the 0.6x Wangle, which I'd see as more of an 'effects' lens and accept it as a non-zoom-through quasi-filter, at at that price point it's acceptable. I'd probably go this route. I have an EX because of its lens, and don't want to compromise it for the most part.

My Sony WA adapter finally showed up and works fine but the tulip shade is permanently glued on which precludes any use of a matte box. I don't know if this fact is common knowledge or not but I certainly didn't know they glued on the tulip shade at the factory. So I've just ordered the Century Optics .75 WA adapter because I need it to fit a matte box but it's way over twice the price of the Sony piece. When the Century WA shows up I'll sell the Sony lens.

- Don

Thanks Matt, Thanks Don,

I didnt know the Century one was double the price of the sony. Thats getting into Letus extreme level spending, which I hope to do down the track.

The sony one seems like a good deal then...but the shade is glued on? Im sure I saw a photo somewhere with it displayed seperate to the tulip shade. Must have been mistaken. But, Im not that pro to even use a matt Box at the moment, I know it helps in situations but hey.

I think Ill get the sony one. I would probably keep it on almost all the time too.

P.s, Hey Matt, is there problems when zooming through with wide angled adaptors?

You weren't mistaken because I've seen the same picture with the tulip shade sitting right beside the lens. The shade had one of those chrome tightening screws on it, similar to the screw design on the stock EX lens hood.

I found out about the glued on shade from someone else and when mine showed up the other day, sure enough, the tulip shade was glued on.

- Don

None. They're both totally zoom-thru. (talking Z1 ones here!)

I used mine for the first time on a project this week, it works well but you do get a lot of barrel distortion, more than I used to get with the Canon A1 wide adapter. Here's a grab...

Ah, you beat me to it, Paul. I just finished doing a short test.

For Alexander:

Check out the photos of the WA lens and its glued on shade. I've also included EX frame grabs: first one without the WA lens, second one with the lens and the third grab using the WA lens and fully zoomed in @14x.

- Don

Don,

Apologies if this is off-topic but what's the mic adapter you're using in the shots above. Even before I start using the wide angle adapter I'm getting the supplemental microphone mounted using the Sony mic holder showing in the top corner of the frame when zoomed out and obviously need something similar to what you've shown here to avoid that problem.

Thanks,
Ian

Ian,

You can go here to see the mic mount:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...014#post846014

Scroll to the bottom of the page.

- Don

Try a Rode SM5,i've got one,it moves the mic up out of the field of view and gives suspension at the same time. Google it.

Paul.

Paul.
Thanks for posting the shot. It does seem to barrel out at the wide. Is that common with that kind of lens ? Perhaps when wide open and fairly close up to something?

Don,
Thanks for posting those shots. I haven't found a shop here that has a Sony Wide Angle set up for display so that was helpful.
I'd be very interested to see some comparison shots of the Sony and the Century when yo get it- if you have time.

Cheers, Alex

Considering the $450.00 price tag of the Sony piece I don't find the amount of spherical distortion all that surprising. On the other hand the Schneider .75 adapter is almost 3 times the price ($1235.00) so I'd suspect the distortion to be somewhat less. I've seen the results from a Canon wide angle HD lens that had a wider field of view than the two above but there was virtually no distortion. That lens was worth $60,000.00.

Don,
Have you received your century Wide Angle Lens yet? How is it compared to the Sony one? I was thinking of buying the Sony lens this weekend but might wait if the difference can justify the price.

Alexander - it is indeed very common for 'full zoom-through' wide-angle converters to barrel distort in this way. Being 'wide open and fairly close' has no bearing on the distortion whatsoever - the distortion exists and is visible on any straight line that doesn't pass exactly through the centre of the frame.

I really think Sony have got this wrong. It's a very mild wide-angle (0,8x) with a lot of distortion, yet it is big, heavy and expensive. On top of that it doesn't come with the excellent 16:9 barn-doors hood as the V1 's wideangle has.

I bet it's sharp and flare-free though, but fear the design trade has been distortion for sharpness. OK until you start tracking through doorways or doing any architecture work. And remember barrel distortion barrels the bride's waistline too - there's no getting away from it.

tom.