Hello Sunny,

I'm a budget-minded consumer myself. I decide very carefully what I spend most of my money on, and what I bargain price shop for. Take a look at Cokin video filters, they have an adaptor ring (model P-499) that fits the 16:9 adaptor (although the screws that come with the ring are way to long, so I replaced them) With the adaptor ring I can attach my Cokin "P" series filter holder that I use with my digital SLR camera. The filter holder has it's own sunshade that only cost about $10.00. The adaptor was $30.00 and the filter holder is around $25.00. It may not look professional, but it gets the job done. Maybe after a few years I'll upgrade my setup, but I have my money set on other sights.

With all due respect to Schneider Optics and similar companies, why are the sunshades (moreover, all related accessories) so expensive? Is the reason because such items are not mass produced? I mean, $100 for the sunshade/filter holder is by far the cheapest I've seen, but I'm still having an extremely difficult time trying to justify the cost.

I'm just an amateur videographer and I'm new to the world of buying accessories for my GL2. I'm just really surprised that should I decide to purchase the necessary accessories for my 16:9 adapter (ie sunshade, filters), the total cost will be a significant percentage of what I originally paid for the GL2.

Maybe I should pick up a less costly hobby!


Sunny,

You made the point exactly in your comment. A $100 sunshade filter holder is the least expensive I've seen that does both. We manufacture mostly sunshade filter holders because most people want to be able to filter thier lens and it is less expensive than buying a matte box (unless you want to use a polarizer).

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

We just found one more 16:9 GL adapter during year end inventory that we are selling for $99.00. I would imagine that this will last a very limited time as well. Order through the website or give us a call if you want it.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Ryan, thanks for letting us know.

Sold !!

Oh yes, thanks to Bob Thieda too. Without this thread I might not have ever know about this great deal for my GL 2 cams.

Your welcome!
And I want to thank Chris van der Zaan for posting that link to the $99 sun shade and filter holder.
Mine arrived yesterday and it's very nice....And it fits my wide angle lens also!

Now I just need to get some filters for it.

Bob T.

Bob T.

Which wideangle do you have that fits with the 16:9 from Schneider? I just received mine, and now want a wide-angle to compliment.

Thanks,
S Korson

Bob T.

Which wideangle do you have that fits with the 16:9 from Schneider? I just received mine, and now want a wide-angle to compliment.

Thanks,
S Korson

Steve....Sorry, I believe I wasn't clear....
I ordered the sunshade/filter holder for my 16:9 adapter here:
http://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=1460&IID=949

And it also happens to fit my WD-58 Wide angle lens...
Which is very cool!


Bob

WI've now had time to work with my new 16:9 lens. Maybe we can compare notes and see if the rest of you have experienced the same thing and made the same discoveries.

Here's what I discovered. Some great things and some I don't completely understand. So if you have some insite, please let me know.

I'm sure that most of you understand what a home DVD player does and doesn't do to an anamorphic picture.
So , here goes: I used the 16:9 lens on my GL2, (of course NOT using the 16:9 setting on the camera), I made a test video, and then I burned my DVD using Adobe Premiere Elements. BTW, through some trial and error burns I found it best to select the NTSC fullscreen mode in Adobe just prior to burning the test DVD, here's what I found.

First, I've got to mention that since I have a 16:9 TV, I set my DVD player to the 16:9 setting. This is the correct setting and it has been this way for years. As you know, if you have read this far, this properly displays the anamorphic DVDs using the full resolution that the TV can provide. So, all pictures have the proper aspect ratio and correct geometry.

The burned Test DVD mentioned in the previous paragraph, ( burned in the "fullscreen" mode using Adobe), will properly display on my 16:9 TV with my DVD player in the 16:9 setting. Proper geometry and no black bars. The picture aspect setting on my TV is labeled "wide" which is the 16:9 setting. Everything looks great.

Now here's the problem: Take the same DVD and show it on a standard 4:3 TV with the DVD player properly set on 4:3 Pan-and-Scan setting. The picture from my test DVD is distorted geometrically. The geometry in the picture is squeezed horizontally. In other words, people are tall and skinny. Yes, I know that's what the 16:9 lens does to the picture when it is taken with the GL2. However, as we all know, the player, set in the 4:3 setting should put black bars at the top and bottom of the picture when it corrects the anamorphic picture and gives us a picture with correct geometry...... but in this case, there are no black bars and no geometric correction.

This would not be an issue if everyone had a 16:9 widescreen display. However, I have a wedding coming up and the couple has a 16:9 TV, but both sets of parents have older 4:3 TVs. The couple wants the wedding done in widescreen so there will be no vertical black bars at the sides of their picture when the geometry of the picutre is correct................. see the problem??
Suggestions???


Afterthought......
I did reburn the test DVD using the NTSC widescreen setting with Adobe Premiere Elements and that still results in a squeezed the picture, (horizontally), on a 4:3 TV but it throws vertical black bars up on the sides of the picture of my 16:9 TV. They cannot be removed in any setting on the TV. Plus the geometry is incorrect on all TV aspect ratio settings.

Tom....I don't know Adobe Premier as I use Vegas Pro 8...

But in Vegas, the first thing I do after placing the clips in the time line is right click on each clip and change the clip's properties from 4:3 to 16:9......(I can do all the clips in a time line at once with a script)
After that...I treat the project as if it came from a 16:9 camera and render in 16:9....
Seems to work....but as I said, I'm using Vegas...

Bob T.

Is there a "letter box" or "LB" display option on the DVD player in question - for use with 4x3 TV sets? That may give the full width (at loss of some lines) for full screen anamorphic recordings.

Is there a "letter box" or "LB" display option on the DVD player in question - for use with 4x3 TV sets? That may give the full width (at loss of some lines) for full screen anamorphic recordings.

Thanks Bob....... I'll check.


Yes Don, tried that too.....but no cigar.
Video was still vertically squeezed and no black bars at the top and bottom.

EDIT : NO,NO,NO, I mean horizontally squeezed In other words, people are very tall and skinny... sorry bout that............

EDIT:
OK, here's what I found.
Bob, right click reveals nothing about the aspect ratio choices in Adobe.
However, if i go into the "motion" menu of the clip(s), I can control the vertical and horizontal xy scaling. I can take the picture as it comes from my GL2 and widen it a bit and then compress the top and bottom to get the correct geometry in the picture. I know that will show black bars on the top and bottom of a 4:3 TV screen in the player in the 4:3 mode. I'll have to burn a DVD to be sure. I'm just afraid that it will simply throw up those same black bars on my 16:9 TV. Of course they should not be there. I'll let you know. Thanks for your replies.

Tom, I did alot of playing around a year ago with this. You have to capture your video in a 16:9 ratio, or go into Premere and Zoom your video 133% (that is the calculated zoom from 480 lines of resolution to 360 "cropped" wide screen). BUT with the new 16:9 adaptor, we do not have to zoom the original 4:3 ratio DV footage! So the new process is to change the Pixle Ratio from .9 to 1.2 (should be under File - Interpret Footage). Changing the pixle ratio will stretch the video footage into the correct widescreen format without decreasing the resolution. Then you have to burn a widescreen DVD using your new 16:9 DV footage.

Hope this helps :)

Thanks so much David.... now we are getting there.
regards, Tom B.

(I also posted this question over in the Elements section)

Well, I've got to tell everyone that it is working and doing what I hoped it would do. Thanks to Bob, Don and David. David, you were right, that was part of my problem.

It now does everything the way it should and when it should. Thanks so much for your help and suggestions. A forum member by the name of Dylan Pank from the UK helped me a lot with details too.

Thanks again, Tom B.

Sorry for the delay. I have been quite busy the past weeks Someone asked to post some pictures of the sunshade mounted on the lens and camera. I don't have a GL2, but i do have a VX2100. (Which i bought especially because of this lens offer) I must say it is an awesome lens. It does everything i hoped for. Zooming is still ok till 6x.. I am quite a zoom freak in occasions where it allows me to do so and i still can do every move i am used to. The sunshade looks bad ass. I got some 'oohhs' and 'ahhs' from friends. The standard VX2100 sunshade looks like some kiddy thing when this baby shows up. :)

Anyway, enough with the talk, here are the pictures:

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/IMG_2155.JPG
http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/IMG_2156.JPG

I also bought the LCD magnifier (http://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=1460&IID=950) which i really like. It unsqueezes the image to true 16:9 and on top of that it magnifies the LCD. It's really much better then without. I can see a lot more details. It didn't attach it when i shot the current photo's, but i will post one where it is attached later on.

Thanks Chris. I agree, that hood looks great!

I followed your link to take a look at the LCD magnifier but it would sure help if I could see how it looks on your camera. I'm looking forward to your picture.

Also, just in case someone is interested, here's a link over to the Premiere Elements section and my steps to using the 16:9 adapter with the GL2.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=112482&page=2

Sorry for the slow reply again. I will post a picture this week. I have been so busy the past months.

Looks like i was woohooing a bit too early with this lens. I have shot some footage the past 2 months. All looked great on cam. But this week i wanted to edit the footage on computer and I discovered there is -serious- vignetting. It is not visible on the viewfinder or the LCD, but it is visible in the footage when you capture/view it on computer.

It is pretty bad. I have to zoom in to at least 2x to get rid of it. This lens is virtually unusable when i am filming documentary. Because i can never see if there is vignetting or not.

This wasn't mentioned in the description on SO website. :( It just mentioned something about the zoom through issue, but not vignetting. :(

I don't know what to do now. I wanted a 16:9 cam with good low light output. I bought the VX2100 when i saw that great deal, but now i got one which does vignetting.

I have looked if there is still a filter/step up ring left on the VX2100. Nope. I have also carefully adjusted the 16:9 lens, but the vignetting stays. Another solution might be to crop some of the image in post.

I think i could have better bought the FX1 or something to have real 16:9, but 2 steps down low light performance...

I wonder, does the bayonet mount version have vignetting as well?

Chris,

The problems you are having with your Century 16:9 adapter are not representative of anything we have here in the Office or anything we currently produce.

This means that your problem should be unique and needs to be fixed. It is possible that you recieved an older stock version (you bought it on an inventory reduction sale) in which we did have an issue with the lens vignetting in underscan or editing but not in the viewfinder at the time of acquisition.

We would like to test this lens here at our facility and see if we can duplicate the problem. At the minimum, please post some screen shots or something to give us an idea of what you are looking at. We would like to help you in any way we can.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Hi Ryan.

Thanks for your great reply. I have made some pictures, please look at them.
I just played around with it some more and it seems the vignetting stays visible until about 4x zoom. (!) Considering the zoom gets blurry at about 6 this is pretty bad.


Anything with less zoom shows vignetting.
This is what i shot first, before i watched the footage on computer:

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture002.jpg

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture002_cam.jpg

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture004.jpg


I did some readjustments tonight, by looking at the image on pc, and i was able to make it look like this. It is night at this moment, so i don't know what it looks like at daylight. (as you see at the other pictures the barrel is clearly visible, while it is black now) :

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture005_pc.jpg

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture005_cam.jpg

This is the best i can get out of it.
I have bought two pieces of the 16:9 58mm mount lense and both show the same issue on Sony VX2100 cam. Maybe both are an older revision of the lense? (bad luck)

It would be great if we can fix this issue. I can send both adapters to the USA as soon as possible if needed.

Hi Ryan.

Thanks for your great reply. I have made some pictures, please look at them.
I just played around with it some more and it seems the vignetting stays visible until about 4x zoom. (!) Considering the zoom gets blurry at about 6 this is pretty bad.


Anything with less zoom shows vignetting.
This is what i shot first, before i watched the footage on computer:

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture002.jpg

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture002_cam.jpg

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture004.jpg


I did some readjustments tonight, by looking at the image on pc, and i was able to make it look like this. It is night at this moment, so i don't know what it looks like at daylight. (as you see at the other pictures the barrel is clearly visible, while it is black now) :

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture005_pc.jpg

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture005_cam.jpg

This is the best i can get out of it.
I have bought two pieces of the 16:9 58mm mount lense and both show the same issue on Sony VX2100 cam. Maybe both are an older revision of the lense? (bad luck)

It would be great if we can fix this issue. I can send both adapters to the USA as soon as possible if needed.

Upon further review of your images this is what's going on:

1) Your piece is functioning as designed. It was designed to be used in conjunction with an editing program that has the capability to "unsqueeze" the image and transform it into 16:9 letter box. Once you do this, you will not see any vignette even in underscan WITHIN the editing program or on final display.

2) If you are pulling this off footage straight off the camera and into the computer WITHOUT going through an editing program, you will see the problems that you are demonstrating.

If this is indeed what you are doing where you are seeing this problem once in the editing program then there is likely something wrong with your lens.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Hello Ryan,

I have something similar and I didn't notice it until after I captured my video into Premiere Pro CS3. At first I thought it was my lens hood, but I removed the hood and took some digital shots with the camera. In the upper corners there are some Vignette shadows. I also tried turning the adaptor 90 & 180 degrees, and I tried remounting the adaptor again at 90 & 180 degrees. With all the different mounting techniques I still have the little shadows in the same corners. I know that there is a small amount of lost picture after I render a DVD video (that's what the "Safe" margins are for) unfortunately, when I render a Media file for posting online the entire image is used, so Safe margins are not relevant and the shadows do appear. I'm just curious if this is normal. Here are some pictures that I took with the camera.

Adaptor1 is a picture with the adaptor mounted normaly.
Adaptor2 is a picture with the adaptor mounted 90 degrees CW.

Also, there is a small dust particle inside the adaptor that I cannot clean. So far I've not noticed it on the final videos, but can I send it in for cleaning?

Hello Ryan,

I have something similar and I didn't notice it until after I captured my video into Premiere Pro CS3. At first I thought it was my lens hood, but I removed the hood and took some digital shots with the camera. In the upper corners there are some Vignette shadows. I also tried turning the adaptor 90 & 180 degrees, and I tried remounting the adaptor again at 90 & 180 degrees. With all the different mounting techniques I still have the little shadows in the same corners. I know that there is a small amount of lost picture after I render a DVD video (that's what the "Safe" margins are for) unfortunately, when I render a Media file for posting online the entire image is used, so Safe margins are not relevant and the shadows do appear. I'm just curious if this is normal. Here are some pictures that I took with the camera.

Adaptor1 is a picture with the adaptor mounted normaly.
Adaptor2 is a picture with the adaptor mounted 90 degrees CW.

Also, there is a small dust particle inside the adaptor that I cannot clean. So far I've not noticed it on the final videos, but can I send it in for cleaning?

In editing at underscan in certain software packages you will likely see some vignetting but it shouldn't be as bad as in the previous post. It was designed not to come out on the final image but not all editing programs are the same and it is difficult for us to predict or test how each will work.

Is this coming out on your final image when displayed on a TV or other media?

You can send the lens in for a cleaning. Mail it to our California Office to the attention of John Sioringas our service manager.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Interesting. I had noticed that same thing in my very first capture using the lens attachment. However, there is no problem here.

I use Adobe Premiere elements and although there is a small amount of vignetting on the left side of my editing monitor in the software, it is well outside both safe zones and it has never appeared on the final edit of my projects. I have two of the the 16:9 lens attachments. One for each of my Canon GL2 cams.

Ryan, thanks again. I use Premiere CS2 and have now imported the footage. (yes, i previously captured it straight off the camera without any editing) I have unsqueezed the image (using the method Tom Blizzard described in http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=112482&page=2 ) and i am still left with vignetting.

Picture:

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture006.jpg

What should i do now? Thanks.

Is there something wrong with the lens, because this doesn't look normal to me? (?) Or is it? Basicly it seems to me that this lens just doesn't fit the VX2100 properly. Thus as you said, it might be a design flaw? (?)

I play my footage via beamer/projector/lcd screen only, so what i see in my editing window is what i, and the people i make documentaries for, will see on screen. The safe area comes in handy, but for these output sources is pretty much something of the past i believe.

Thanks again for your help.

Ryan, thanks again. I use Premiere CS2 and have now imported the footage. (yes, i previously captured it straight off the camera without any editing) I have unsqueezed the image (using the method Tom Blizzard described in http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=112482&page=2 ) and i am still left with vignetting.

Picture:

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/vx2100/picture006.jpg

What should i do now? Thanks.

Is there something wrong with the lens, because this doesn't look normal to me? (?) Or is it? Basicly it seems to me that this lens just doesn't fit the VX2100 properly. Thus as you said, it might be a design flaw? (?)

I play my footage via beamer/projector/lcd screen only, so what i see in my editing window is what i, and the people i make documentaries for, will see on screen. The safe area comes in handy, but for these output sources is pretty much something of the past i believe.

Thanks again for your help.

Send it back to us for testing and evaluation. We have obviously exhausted what I can do for you over the internet. It is my bet that you got an older model that slipped past the modifications we made. A rare occurance but like I said it was an inventory clearance sale so anything was possible. We will do our best to ensure that your Century attachment performs to the highest standard we can make it.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Thanks Ryan. Which address should i use? The West or East Coast Office one?

Is there anything i need to write on the package. Like your or someone else his name. Or do i need to include prints of this topic, so the receiver will know what this is about?

Thanks Ryan. Which address should i use? The West or East Coast Office one?

Is there anything i need to write on the package. Like your or someone else his name. Or do i need to include prints of this topic, so the receiver will know what this is about?

Schneider Optics
ATTN: John Sioringas
7701 Haskell Ave
Van Nuys, CA 91406

Both lenses are on their way via ups. They should arrive next week.

It took some time because i had to finish an assignment which i originally started to film with the lens on. I am currently cropping ~10% at the left/right to remove the vignetting.

I wonder, does the '.2X TELE CONV. 58MM BSTOCK' lens work fine on a hd camera? (Canon HV30 and 58mm>43mm step down ring) If it is possible to ship it together with the 16:9 lenses i will consider to buy it.

Both lenses are on their way via ups. They should arrive next week.

It took some time because i had to finish an assignment which i originally started to film with the lens on. I am currently cropping ~10% at the left/right to remove the vignetting.

I wonder, does the '.2X TELE CONV. 58MM BSTOCK' lens work fine on a hd camera? (Canon HV30 and 58mm>43mm step down ring) If it is possible to ship it together with the 16:9 lenses i will consider to buy it.

This particular lens displayed a significant amount of chromatic abberation. It was not designed for HD use. We are currently considering other options to solve this problem.

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

Thanks Ryan.

I have one more question. Is there some kind of cover available for the 4X4 SUNSHADE FILTER/HOLDER. Something that slides over or snaps on the sunshade. That way i can protect the lens a bit when i am carrying the camera around.

I would like to order such cover and maybe also a standard LCD MAGNIFIER 150/170/2100, but i will wait for updates about the lenses.

Hello Ryan,

Is there any news yet?

Hi Chris,
I'm sorry that you are having a problem with your lens. I believe that Ryan will get it straightened out for you. Now here's my take on the lens.

_________________________________________________________________
Now for Ryan,

For those of you who might be considering this lens maybe from B&H or another source since it is no longer available from Century, I've got to tell you that I am very pleased with the lens.

I did a project with two GL2s. One using the 16:9 adapter and one with the lens that comes on the GL2. The picture quality was identical on both and it is great to fill my 16:9 LCD screen with that picture.

In the edit monitor, when viewing the camera lens set to full wide, I could see a small amount of viginetting on the very outside edge of the screen, but it is outside both the "action" and the "title" safe zones. Therefore it is no problem. I can zoom in about 2/3rds of the normal zoom before the GL2 can not longer focus. So, if necessary, I just move my GL2 a little closer to what I'm taping.

I even took this one step further and used both cameras on a recent project. One cam using the 16:9 lens and the other using the stock 4:3 setting. I then cross faded back and fourth between the two in my editing.
I processed the 4:3 in that setting with Adobe P.E. and the 16:9 using the widescreen settings. They both worked like they should. In other words, on my 16:9 LCD, the 4:3 shots were windowboxed like many of today's standard definition commercials when they are being transmitted during a HD program and displayed on a 16:9 HD set. Then, as expected, the 16:9 anamorphic scenes filled the whole screen and everything was geometrically correct.

In contrast, when shown on a 4:3 CRT, older display. the 16:9 scenes had black bars at the top and bottom of the square display screen, while the 4:3 scenes filled the screen.

Just wanted to let Ryan know that the lens is working great with my GL2 and I will be able to now offer the "widescreen" option for weddings and other projects.
Thanks, Ryan

Hey Tom. Thanks for the heads up. I have received an email from Schneider stating that both lenses have passed the quality test. So i guess i am unlucky.

However i wonder why mr David L. Holmes has much less vignetting than i have. (see the attachment) Is this a difference between camera types? (he is using a GL2, i am using a Sony VX2100)

I have shown my footage to a few clients. Out of three, two complained about the vignetting, 'What is that?' So it is something i have to care about. My only solution is to cut about 10% from the picture, (basicly both so called 'overscan' sides) so the whole vignetting is not visible. I can then either zoom the picture (in post) or leave it with two small black bars at the left/right. Which in both cases looks much less distracting than the vignetting. -> And people do not start to wonder if something is wrong.

I don't want to bash Schneider, because they have been very helpful. They also don't charge me for any return shipping costs. (i am very glad, because the shipping to Schneider cost me 75 euro) But i still think my vignetting problem is quite bad. How much vignetting do you have Tom? Could you make a screenshot? (in windows xp, just click on the cam in my computer and find the button 'make snapshot')

Chris,
Well, if I hadn't already bought two of the lens, I'd sure give you what you paid, or more, for one of them..... Plus your postage. I like the lens that much.
I would think that someone with a GL2 who has been following this thread might be interested and make you an offer. I sure would. Just think, with their GL2 and this lens, they can now get the quality of the GL2 picture plus full resolution and anamorphic 16:9 at an amazing price! I just can't explain why David is getting so much less viginetting than you.
Wish I knew more about your camera and just why the lens does that.
I guess you could consider ebay if you don't find a satisfactory solution. I know it must be very frustrating to you.
Regards, Tom B.

Chris,
Well, if I hadn't already bought two of the lens, I'd sure give you what you paid, or more, for one of them..... Plus your postage. I like the lens that much.
I would think that someone with a GL2 who has been following this thread might be interested and make you an offer. I sure would. Just think, with their GL2 and this lens, they can now get the quality of the GL2 picture plus full resolution and anamorphic 16:9 at an amazing price! I just can't explain why David is getting so much less viginetting than you.
Wish I knew more about your camera and just why the lens does that.
I guess you could consider ebay if you don't find a satisfactory solution. I know it must be very frustrating to you.
Regards, Tom B.

I have asked Schneider the same question. I hope they can give an answer. I still think the lens is a steal for $99. However, i would be seriously disappointed when i paid the main price. ($895) This is not the quality i expect from such an expensive lens.

I will probably put one on Ebay or a different market place (like the sales section here) for $99 + the extra costs i made. I will keep the other one.

in progress

Status so far:

Unfortunately not 'solved'. Statement from Schneider: falls within quality specification.

Right now there is another problem:

The lenses were sent back to me, but are hold by UPS. They want me to pay a big amount of duty costs. However, i have already paid duty (of the same lenses) back in December. The problem.. Schneider wrote a $700 value on the package, so they (UPS duty department) probably thought they were new goods.

I can't get any further than the first line call centre at the UPS helpdesk. I talked with many reps there. They all tell me to pay the bill. They don't want to get me on the phone with the duty department or someone who can fix this problem. Very annoying. I hate these kind of bureaucratic companies. So far it remains silent from Schneider as well.

Sigh....

There is a Dutch saying: goedkoop is duurkoop. Which means cheap goods, get expensive in the end. I have learned my lesson.

Chris,

I never use UPS if I can find ANY alternative!!!!! Shipping from us to Canada, they charge a flat 51 dollars brokerage fee on anything, even a 5 dollar object!!!! No taxes or duties and you still get clipped!!!

I hope you can sort it out, last time that happened to me I ended up giving up and paying the extra expenses.


good luck!!!

Still haven't got my lenses, nearly two months later. They are still with UPS and they won't give them to me.

I do not blame UPS only for this. As they did not declare a 700 dollar value for return/warranty goods. An amount which i never paid as well.... (it was 2x $99)

Finally got my lenses. Schneider Optics came to the rescue and paid the fee which UPS wanted from me.

Case closed. Thank you Schneider Optics for the help.

Hi Chris,
Well, it took a while didn't it. Glad everything worked out OK.
Thanks for posting your pictures of the lens hood several months ago. I finally ordered mine and they are great. Considering the great price, they are fantastic.

Yes, it was a bit frustrating. But i guess it happens.

I am glad i can leave this behind now. :)

Good to hear you like the hood. I still do as well. I use it as my main hood. I clamp it on my Raynox Wide Angle lens as well.

This is what happened with the 16:9 lens magnifier

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/2323/lens1fq0.jpg

ImageShack - Hosting :: lens2fe6.jpg (http://img20.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lens2fe6.jpg)


each of the hinges broke until the cap came off. i didnt use any force or something. i have used it about 7x during assignments.

pretty weak construction for the price. ($75)

Hi Chris,
I can't find a link to send you an email so I'll just put it here...... sorry boss if this is the wrong place :)

Anyway, are you interested in selling your Century Optics 16:9 Widescreen Adapter ?

Thanks, Tom B.

Hey Tom,
I have my 16:9 adaptor if you want to buy it.

Dave

Thanks Dave,
I am interested. I am picking up another GL2 and my others have the adapter. Have you decided on a price??
You can email me and let me know.

Regards, Tom B.