Century Optics 16:9 Widescreen Adapter

Marco Leavitt · March 27th, 2004, 10:15 AM

It's a really strange price point isn't it? I can appreciate they're hard to make, but seriously... There was some speculation in here a while back that Century hadn't even shipped any because nobody seems to have it in stock. B&H still doesn't have it, and I'm starting to wonder if Century is rethinking the whole deal. Who would buy this lens when Canon is starting to put decent 16:9 modes on its low-end camcorders and Sony has introduced the PDX-10? There's probably going to be a whole slew of native 16:9 prosumer cams this year, and maybe even HD. The only reason I can think of to buy it is out of the hope that you will be able to use it on an HD camcorder in the future. How cool would that be? But who knows if it can even resolve enough lines to make it worth the trouble.

Pete Bauer · March 27th, 2004, 10:22 AM

Yeah, I was waiting and watching for this glass to show up, but with a new crop of HDV cameras just around the corner (or so we all believe!), I've decided to wait for the new cameras and not spend the money on it even if the adapter actually becomes available.

Don't know whether these adapters will actually become available, but the market seems to be shrinking by the day so can't see how it would be profitable for Century Optics.

Zack Birlew · September 23rd, 2004, 01:10 PM

Hey, I'm stuck with a GL1 for awhile, since the new Sony Pro HDV camera is a ways off, and I'm looking at upgrades and stuff I can get for the GL1 in the meantime. Anyway, I was wondering, is anybody using the Century Optics 16:9 adapter? What's the differece between that and the 1.33x Anamorphic adapter? I'm asking because I'd like to get one, but the 1.33x Anamorphic adapter is like $1000, while the 16:9 adapter is $700. So what's the difference, aren't they both the same thing? Any good?

Pete Bauer · September 23rd, 2004, 02:14 PM

Jack,

I haven't actually used either one, but the older adapter, DS-1609-GL, is not full zoom-through. The newer 1.33x, the DS-WS13-GL, is supposed to be full zoom but very expensive and either was not released or at best is hard to find. The last time I checked a few months ago, it was not actually available anywhere. B&H currently still shows it as a special order, just as it was months ago. I'm not aware of anyone who has tested one...that question was asked a few months ago here on DVInfo.net also and nobody seemed to have seen one.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont....x=9&image.y=9

Naturally it is up to you, but I'd be doubtful about dropping big cash on the anamorphic adapter at this point in time -- even if you can get the full zoom-through -- unless you really need it to be able to make $$$.

This is a personal choice, of course, but I decided to just make do with the GL2's in-camera 16:9 with a WD-58H adapter slapped on the front...until I could get an HDV camera. Then Canon released the XL2 and I couldn't resist! I'll now be very happy to wait patiently until I'm confident HDV makes it worth parting with the XL2 (for probably not all that much of a loss -- well-cared for XL's seem to hold their value well).

Here's a couple of thread links:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...ury+anamorphic

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...ury+anamorphic

Cheers,

Boyd Ostroff · September 23rd, 2004, 03:43 PM

B&H lists the 1.33 anamorphic for $1,300, special order as you say. That seems real overkill for a GL-1. You can get a new PDX-10 with real 16:9, XLR's, short shotgun mike, DVCAM, etc for $1,850 at B&H. Could you get $1,100 if you sold your GL-1? Might be a better use of the $700...

Zack Birlew · September 24th, 2004, 12:03 AM

Hmmmm, true. But my parents, my current source of income, want me to do something with the GL1 to show them that my skills are worthy enough to warrant a new camera. However, they were the ones that turned cheap on me when the camera buying was taking place, so I had to settle with the GL1. So, in order to actually "do" anything like what they're thinking, I need the accessories and that means the 16:9 adapter. I guess I'll just get the moderately less expensive 16:9 adapter instead of the 1.33x Anamorphic adapter and see what happens next. But I also see this as an opportunity to really hone my video skills for the future HDV cameras to come, so until then I'll be in training with my GL1. (Besides they would refuse me buying another camera even if it's a $400 ZR80 or something =) )

Boyd Ostroff · September 24th, 2004, 07:56 AM

Well if this is all an excercise to prove yourself to your parents, then why not just use the GL-1 without the anamorphic adaptor?

Rob Lohman · September 24th, 2004, 08:30 AM

Jack: the tool doesn't create the art, you do. You can create a
compelling and interesting story with any camera basically. Yes
a "better" camera "might" help. The GL1 is an EXCELLENT piece
of equipment. Don't get hung on having the latest and greatest!

Bill Ball · September 24th, 2004, 04:23 PM

I dont actually own one (though I'd like to), but I did spend a good amount of time trying one of the original 16:9 adapters (the $700) version out on a GL-2 at DVexpo. I really liked it.

Its much smaller and lighter than Canon's wide angle lens (WD-58), which I have but dont use much because its such a massive hunk of glass for that camera. The 16:9 adpater is easy to set up. Since I shoot in 16:9 basically all the time I would just leave it set up on the camera.

From what I could tell in my limited test it does improve the quality of the image.

It does reduce your Zoom range--by 33% easily and perhaps as much as 50%. This shouldnt be much of a problem as it doesnt make much sense to put on a wide angle adapter and then zoom in very far.

The only things holding me off are the $700 price tag (its nice to know its a quality piece but that still a lot for an adapter to a $2000 camera) and the lack of front threads for filters (I'm pretty sure I could get a 95mm filter stuck on there though).

Michael Kopp · September 25th, 2004, 01:06 AM

there is no substitute for artistic creativity... let me just get that out of the way... ok.

now. the CPO 16:9 adapter on my GL-2 is amazing. if you are shootoing to 16:9 on this camera, this is the way to go. it actually adds a bit of more 'film-like' thing to it... hard to describe, but that's my HOP.

Yes there is some zoom reduction, but for wide shots, i've blended shots with the canon wide and the 16:9 with little notice... fix the res blend in post... all good.

they are expensive, but i got mine on ebay for about $400. look for people going from gl-2 to xl-2... they'll be selling out very soon. think about it.

the killer? i've used this adapter to shoot ala 'Marla" into a Nikon. Wow, so close to true wide angle... thought i was Paul Thomas Anderson... then woke up.

Crap.

Marco Leavitt · September 25th, 2004, 11:18 AM

I have the Century anamorphic and really like it, but at this time in DV's evolution, I kind of agree with Boyd. I don't know that I would consider it such a great investment to buy one at full price. Why not try getting one used? They show up on eBay from time to time for under $400. That's where I got mine. I would say that it makes an enormous difference with the GL1 if you want to shoot 16:9. Plus, it gives you a wide angle of view with less distortion than the WD58. I never take mine off. I'd avoid the bayonet mount because who knows, if you had the threaded version you might find some wacky use for it in a few years when every camcorder already has native 16:9.

Marco Leavitt · October 6th, 2004, 01:16 PM

This is kind of an old thread, but I thought that people might want to know that the Century zoom-through does in fact exist. I called over there a few days ago and was told it was selling at an insane rate and that's why you don't see them in stock anywhere. You can buy them directly from Century though for list -- ouch!

John Anders · September 30th, 2005, 02:22 PM

Just got a Century Optics 16:9 lens for our GL2. For Some reason it is Fish eyeing all the footage . Is this normal? Is It the Lens? Or is there something with in the camera that needs to be setup. We have a shoot this weekend and any help with this problem would be greatly appreciated.

Marco Leavitt · September 30th, 2005, 02:42 PM

Do you have the partial zoom or full zoom through version? I've got the partial zoom version and used to use it with the GL1. I had no fisheye effect at all. In fact, at full wide I'd say there was less distortion than with the WD58.

John Anders · September 30th, 2005, 03:02 PM

Its a Partial Zoom. Its The Century DS-1609GL if that at all helps. We bought it used yesterday. We would hate to have to return it.

March 27th, 2004, 10:22 AM	#32
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	Yeah, I was waiting and watching for this glass to show up, but with a new crop of HDV cameras just around the corner (or so we all believe!), I've decided to wait for the new cameras and not spend the money on it even if the adapter actually becomes available. Don't know whether these adapters will actually become available, but the market seems to be shrinking by the day so can't see how it would be profitable for Century Optics. __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

September 23rd, 2004, 01:10 PM	#33
Zack Birlew Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 613	Anybody using the Century Optics 16:9 adapter? Hey, I'm stuck with a GL1 for awhile, since the new Sony Pro HDV camera is a ways off, and I'm looking at upgrades and stuff I can get for the GL1 in the meantime. Anyway, I was wondering, is anybody using the Century Optics 16:9 adapter? What's the differece between that and the 1.33x Anamorphic adapter? I'm asking because I'd like to get one, but the 1.33x Anamorphic adapter is like $1000, while the 16:9 adapter is $700. So what's the difference, aren't they both the same thing? Any good? __________________ "Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew www.BabsDoProductions.com

September 23rd, 2004, 02:14 PM	#34
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	Jack, I haven't actually used either one, but the older adapter, DS-1609-GL, is not full zoom-through. The newer 1.33x, the DS-WS13-GL, is supposed to be full zoom but very expensive and either was not released or at best is hard to find. The last time I checked a few months ago, it was not actually available anywhere. B&H currently still shows it as a special order, just as it was months ago. I'm not aware of anyone who has tested one...that question was asked a few months ago here on DVInfo.net also and nobody seemed to have seen one. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont....x=9&image.y=9 Naturally it is up to you, but I'd be doubtful about dropping big cash on the anamorphic adapter at this point in time -- even if you can get the full zoom-through -- unless you really need it to be able to make $$$. This is a personal choice, of course, but I decided to just make do with the GL2's in-camera 16:9 with a WD-58H adapter slapped on the front...until I could get an HDV camera. Then Canon released the XL2 and I couldn't resist! I'll now be very happy to wait patiently until I'm confident HDV makes it worth parting with the XL2 (for probably not all that much of a loss -- well-cared for XL's seem to hold their value well). Here's a couple of thread links: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...ury+anamorphic http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...ury+anamorphic Cheers, __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

September 24th, 2004, 12:03 AM	#36
Zack Birlew Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 613	Hmmmm, true. But my parents, my current source of income, want me to do something with the GL1 to show them that my skills are worthy enough to warrant a new camera. However, they were the ones that turned cheap on me when the camera buying was taking place, so I had to settle with the GL1. So, in order to actually "do" anything like what they're thinking, I need the accessories and that means the 16:9 adapter. I guess I'll just get the moderately less expensive 16:9 adapter instead of the 1.33x Anamorphic adapter and see what happens next. But I also see this as an opportunity to really hone my video skills for the future HDV cameras to come, so until then I'll be in training with my GL1. (Besides they would refuse me buying another camera even if it's a $400 ZR80 or something =) ) __________________ "Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew www.BabsDoProductions.com

September 24th, 2004, 08:30 AM	#38
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	Jack: the tool doesn't create the art, you do. You can create a compelling and interesting story with any camera basically. Yes a "better" camera "might" help. The GL1 is an EXCELLENT piece of equipment. Don't get hung on having the latest and greatest! __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

March 27th, 2004, 10:15 AM	#31
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	It's a really strange price point isn't it? I can appreciate they're hard to make, but seriously... There was some speculation in here a while back that Century hadn't even shipped any because nobody seems to have it in stock. B&H still doesn't have it, and I'm starting to wonder if Century is rethinking the whole deal. Who would buy this lens when Canon is starting to put decent 16:9 modes on its low-end camcorders and Sony has introduced the PDX-10? There's probably going to be a whole slew of native 16:9 prosumer cams this year, and maybe even HD. The only reason I can think of to buy it is out of the hope that you will be able to use it on an HD camcorder in the future. How cool would that be? But who knows if it can even resolve enough lines to make it worth the trouble.

September 23rd, 2004, 03:43 PM	#35
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	B&H lists the 1.33 anamorphic for $1,300, special order as you say. That seems real overkill for a GL-1. You can get a new PDX-10 with real 16:9, XLR's, short shotgun mike, DVCAM, etc for $1,850 at B&H. Could you get $1,100 if you sold your GL-1? Might be a better use of the $700...

September 24th, 2004, 07:56 AM	#37
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	Well if this is all an excercise to prove yourself to your parents, then why not just use the GL-1 without the anamorphic adaptor?

September 24th, 2004, 04:23 PM	#39
Bill Ball Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: NEW JERSEY Posts: 216	I dont actually own one (though I'd like to), but I did spend a good amount of time trying one of the original 16:9 adapters (the $700) version out on a GL-2 at DVexpo. I really liked it. Its much smaller and lighter than Canon's wide angle lens (WD-58), which I have but dont use much because its such a massive hunk of glass for that camera. The 16:9 adpater is easy to set up. Since I shoot in 16:9 basically all the time I would just leave it set up on the camera. From what I could tell in my limited test it does improve the quality of the image. It does reduce your Zoom range--by 33% easily and perhaps as much as 50%. This shouldnt be much of a problem as it doesnt make much sense to put on a wide angle adapter and then zoom in very far. The only things holding me off are the $700 price tag (its nice to know its a quality piece but that still a lot for an adapter to a $2000 camera) and the lack of front threads for filters (I'm pretty sure I could get a 95mm filter stuck on there though).

September 25th, 2004, 01:06 AM	#40
Michael Kopp New Boot Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: San Francisco Posts: 8	i do own one: fire your questions there is no substitute for artistic creativity... let me just get that out of the way... ok. now. the CPO 16:9 adapter on my GL-2 is amazing. if you are shootoing to 16:9 on this camera, this is the way to go. it actually adds a bit of more 'film-like' thing to it... hard to describe, but that's my HOP. Yes there is some zoom reduction, but for wide shots, i've blended shots with the canon wide and the 16:9 with little notice... fix the res blend in post... all good. they are expensive, but i got mine on ebay for about $400. look for people going from gl-2 to xl-2... they'll be selling out very soon. think about it. the killer? i've used this adapter to shoot ala 'Marla" into a Nikon. Wow, so close to true wide angle... thought i was Paul Thomas Anderson... then woke up. Crap.

September 25th, 2004, 11:18 AM	#41
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	I have the Century anamorphic and really like it, but at this time in DV's evolution, I kind of agree with Boyd. I don't know that I would consider it such a great investment to buy one at full price. Why not try getting one used? They show up on eBay from time to time for under $400. That's where I got mine. I would say that it makes an enormous difference with the GL1 if you want to shoot 16:9. Plus, it gives you a wide angle of view with less distortion than the WD58. I never take mine off. I'd avoid the bayonet mount because who knows, if you had the threaded version you might find some wacky use for it in a few years when every camcorder already has native 16:9.

October 6th, 2004, 01:16 PM	#42
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	This is kind of an old thread, but I thought that people might want to know that the Century zoom-through does in fact exist. I called over there a few days ago and was told it was selling at an insane rate and that's why you don't see them in stock anywhere. You can buy them directly from Century though for list -- ouch!

September 30th, 2005, 02:22 PM	#43
John Anders Tourist Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 2	Century optics 16:9 Problem Just got a Century Optics 16:9 lens for our GL2. For Some reason it is Fish eyeing all the footage . Is this normal? Is It the Lens? Or is there something with in the camera that needs to be setup. We have a shoot this weekend and any help with this problem would be greatly appreciated.

September 30th, 2005, 02:42 PM	#44
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Do you have the partial zoom or full zoom through version? I've got the partial zoom version and used to use it with the GL1. I had no fisheye effect at all. In fact, at full wide I'd say there was less distortion than with the WD58.

September 30th, 2005, 03:02 PM	#45
John Anders Tourist Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 2	Its a Partial Zoom. Its The Century DS-1609GL if that at all helps. We bought it used yesterday. We would hate to have to return it.