Century Optics 16:9 Widescreen Adapter

[David L. Holmes]

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?

[Ryan Avery]

Originally Posted by David L. Holmes

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

[Tom Blizzard]

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.

[Chris van der Zaan]

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/showthrea...=112482&page=2 ) and i am still left with vignetting.

Picture:

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/v...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 Avery]

Originally Posted by Chris van der Zaan

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/showthrea...=112482&page=2 ) and i am still left with vignetting.

Picture:

http://users.bart.nl/users/mvdzaan/v...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

[Chris van der Zaan]

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?

[Ryan Avery]

Originally Posted by Chris van der Zaan

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

[Chris van der Zaan]

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.

[Ryan Avery]

Originally Posted by Chris van der Zaan

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

[Chris van der Zaan]

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.

[Chris van der Zaan]

Hello Ryan,

Is there any news yet?

[Tom Blizzard]

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

[Chris van der Zaan]

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')

[Tom Blizzard]

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 van der Zaan]

Originally Posted by Tom Blizzard

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.