Thanks for the review, Brendan - much appreciated. I'm more confident that the wd-58h is the way to go. Just in time for an order today.

wide angle
 

is there a huge difference between the glass or lenses available for the gl2.. there are plenty or lenses available on ebay anywhere from $60 to the wd-58h for $180..

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...category=29964

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...&category=3335

how would those compare to the wd-58h.. i'm getting a wide angle for sure.. just wanted to find out any alternatives.. i like the fact that the wd-58 comes with a hood..

thanks..

-ryan

I got the 58h and use it a lot. The one thing I did not know when I got it is - you can not attach any filters to it. You will have to get a matte box if you want to use filters after you put the 58h on the camera. Some WA converters are threaded. I don't know which ones though.

If you get the WD58 and have double threaded filters you can probably get away with one between the camera and the adapter. A polarizer might be a hard one to manage but other ones that don't rotate might be ok.

Do a search for Wide Angle on here and you'll find lots and lots of threads about it. It seems that the WD58 is the best bang for the buck cause it's got a good price, good quality and full zoom through. You can buy something fancier of course but you will pay a lot more.

Cheers
Aaron

what about cheaper ones..

When it comes to glass, there are no deals. Good glass is expensive to manufacture and expensive to buy. Why would you want to put crap in front of that outstanding Canon flourite lens? Bad glass turns that great GL2 to a piece of daddy-cam junk.

Save up for a good wide-angle adapter such as the WD58H or a Century Optics. Just go without until then.

I hate to admit this, but I bought a $60 wide angle lens off of ebay. For what I do, I couldn't see spending the extra cash. Digital Optics .45x with macro from Japan. Although I've never used the wd58 on my GL2, I'm not that horribly dissapointed with the cheapie. It gives me a nice wide shot and I haven't had any complaints about the image quality.

I would never recommend that you get one in a pro environment, but hey, maybe its worth it for the other stuff.

If I get a chance, I will post len-on/lens-off pics so you can see for yourself.

Tom

Yea, I've just got the raynox .3x semi fish clip on for my rollerblading shots I do. It looks good but I'm going to upgrade to a century when I get the cash for it. They are a lot!

On the WD58h, I do put a filter between the camera and the WD. I haven't put more than one on though. One of these days I know I will have to get matte box, but it will be awhile.

Nobody ever seems to mention the Kenko bayonet WA adapter for GL2, but I've been using it for awhile and I love it. It's $159, (maybe even less now) and you can zoom through as well as put filters on if you'd like. I think Tokina/Kenko make decent glass, and the bayonet is a really fast take off/put on.

.7 wide enough?
 

i'm ready to buy the wd-58 but i'm wondering if .7 is really that wide?

i do a lot of rock climbing filming, where the camera is on a monopod, maybe 2 or 3 feet from the climber.. so i need the wide capapbility.. does anyone have comparison images up close, where they can tell me how close they were to the subject?

thanks..

-r

The wd-58 is a nice wide-angle lens attachment...giving you coverage similar to a 24-28 mm lens on a 35mm camera...it sounds like you would want something wider though.

Century makes a few products in a wider range...a .55 and a fisheye. But beware, you only have use of part of the zoom range with these...so if you want to zoom in to get a look at all the scaredy-cat geeks like myself down at sea level...this may be a problem. Then again, maybe not.

I'm not sure, but I think they are a touch more expensive as well.

http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/camera/1.htm

Barry

heh.. touch more expensive..

i think for money's sake i'll go with the wd-58.. i've been shooting some alright stuff with the regular lens so i think i can make do well enough with wider..

-r

I'm also wondering about a wide-angle lens. I am shooting alot of surfing, and my problem without one is this. When I zoom in to try to get a close-up of the surfer, I lose half the wave. If I get a wide-angle with zoom capabilities will I then have both the surfer and the wave? And which lens has full zoom capabilities.

thanks,

rosie

Rosie,

Are you shooting from the water, or from the beach? The wd-58 is zoom through...but it affects the telephoto end of the zoom the same as the wide end...ie you won't be able to zoom in as close with the wd-58 on as you will without it. Thus it really depends on how much you need the full range of your zoom.

Barry

thanks for responding Barry. I am shooting from the beach, and in some cases, I don't need the full zoom, while in other cases, I do. I guess if I'm going to invest money in one, I would like to have one that allows the full zoom of the camera. Any suggestions? Rosie

this wouldn't be possible... the .7 number (or .55 or .3) that describes the wide angle attachment is a multiplier...ie...multiply the focal length range of the lens (4.2-84mm on the gl2) by the multiplier to get the effective focal range (2.9-59mm with the wd-58). So all of them will give you a shorter maximum zoom in varying degrees...On the other hand, it isn't difficult to remove the adapter...so as long as you're not trying to pull a zoom from maximum zoom to adapter assisted maximum wide, you'd be ok.

Another thought is that you can take advantage of the gl2's digital zoom...it's pretty good out to 40x...showing little loss in quality at that level (100x is pretty bad). At 40x digital zoom using the wd-58 you would be have slightly more zoom range than the 20x lens without the adapter (and dig zoom turned off).

Barry

Footage
 

Sorry, but I'm using a different camera these days, and my GL2 footage is archived.

BUT, I did a similar thing with the Raynox .3X - which is similar to the Edmund lens, and adapted it to my DVX100 with good success.

Soon I'll post the instructions to this project and some samples.

In both cases, the relatively low cost of the lenses pretty much justify their use regardless.
I've had no problems with either, and to my eyes- and I'm a artist/painter part time- they look really nice and perform well.

The Edmund glass is top notch, and I suspect the Raynox glass is similarly good quality. I have not seen any distortion or aberations in either that is of any consequence.

Neil

basically you want a BMW for the price of a ford escort. Just go for the canon you will be satisfied in the end!

BMW
 

Actually, this is a totally inaccurate analogy-- and I in fact drive a Lotus Elan which runs circles around any BMW.
http://www.h2net.net/p/nslade/Papers/elan.html

The Canon is heavy, big, expensive, not so wide, and does not allow you to use the lens shade. This doesn't sound like a BMW to me at all, but rather an overpriced Ford Taurus.

Well, okay.... a nice Toyota Camry.

My lens is small, light, inexpensive, much wider than the Canon, high quality optical material, and allows you to use the shade.
The DIY lens is the race car here you're talking about, not the other way round.

So there.(!)

Neil

WD58H loose a stop?
 

Does anyone have info about how much is lost with the WD58H in place...1 stop? Thanks, Craig Hollenback

Kenko (KRW-075) wide angle adapter
 

Has anyone tried the (KRW-075) by Kenko..it's approx $79.00...wondering if it's a decent piece of glass vs:the WD-58H?
How much of a stop loss with the WD-58H ? thoughts? Tnx, craig

I don't believe there's any loss with the WD58. At least none that I've observed.

Re: Kenko (KRW-075) wide angle adapter
 

<<<-- Originally posted by Craig Hollenback : Has anyone tried the (KRW-075) by Kenko..it's approx $79.00...wondering if it's a decent piece of glass vs:the WD-58H?
How much of a stop loss with the WD-58H ? thoughts? Tnx, craig -->>>

I know nothing about the Kenko, but I personally wouldn't chance it for a measley $100 difference, or less if you buy from one of the eBay stores like Aden, etc.

As to your other question, front-lens convertors do NOT incur a loss of aperture. You're thinking about film teleconverters that go between the lens and camera. All aperture settings remain identical regardless of add-on type -- ie: wide angle or 2X magnifier.

"For what I do, I couldn't see spending the extra cash."

Just a quick question. If you don't need a quality wide angle and can get by with a cheap 60 dollar one, cause its good for "what you do"...then why did you spend 2000 plus dollars on a PROsumer cam. I mean its all personal preference, and if the glass satisfies you then great. But I was just curious. I kind of see it as buying a BMW or corvette and throwing bald tires on it. It just doesn't make sense to me. But hey, to each his own.

Should I get a GL 2 Wide Angle Converter?
 

Hi guys, I'm new to the boards here.


So, I have a GL 2, that I use occasionally. Quite often, I guess. So, is it worth getting the wide angle lense?


Does it distort the picture?


Is it good for a little under $200 from BandH Photo?

Mine never left my camera since I received it !

http://www.natzo.com/GL2-WD58H.jpg

Yes there is some distortion but the subject (fridge) was pretty close in that case.

It has never been a problem so far and you can zoom all the way through.

Dany

PS: If you do a quick search on this topic you'll find a lot of feedback from people wondering about this WA.

I too keep the wide angle on most of the time. Works well for me.
Sandy

Indeed, any truly wide-angle lens will present some distortion under certain circumstances. Subjects, such as faces, up-close can take on a cartoonish appearance. Vertical lines at the edges of the frame, when the lens is at its widest setting, may get some barrel distortion.

But the WD-58 is an excellent add-on lens and greatly expands the versatility of the GL2 (and GL1). It's a real bargain and should be in your tool box if you use the camera in a variety of situations.

The only downside is filters. Be aware that the WD-58 cannot accept any screw-on filters in front. If you want to use filters with it you'll have to get a rrod-mounted matte box and use square filters.

Another question, are there any other lens attachments available for the Gl 2? (And I mean other than filters)

Do you mean accessory lenses such as those from Century Optics?

Would it be possible to attach a screw-on filter to the GL2 lense, then screw the W/A adapter to the filter?

Very possible. My friend has UV and Polarizer filters topped off with the Canon WD-58 and has had no signs of vignetting.

Possible, yes. But at some cost to imaging and focus. The WE-58 is designed to be at a very specific position in the sequence of optical elements that compose your lens assembly. Pushing it out by the depth of a filter or two will have some impact on the image.

Besides, why in the world would you put a UV filter between the 58 and the main lens?!

lazy
 

that is why sometimes I have my UV filter betwen my main lens and the WD-58. It is just the ease of not to screw it off, then screw it on after I finished with the wide angel when I am somewhere shooting some event.
But you have a good point.. in the future I will try to remove the UV filter first :)

Well, the UV bewtween the 2 lenses might be pointless but it's not entirely pointless if it's say a polarizer or colored filter. I've used a polarizer and didn't really notice a huge difference in quality.

The Wide angle though helps alot if you are looking to widen your shot choices.

"Besides, why in the world would you put a UV filter between the 58 and the main lens?!"

Ken,

I am new to this but I thought one of the reasons for the UV filter was to protect the Cam! Would that not be a good enough reason to have it between the lense and the WD58??

Or, have I misunderstood something, don't you need the filter if using the WD?

Thanks for your patience.

Alan,
UV filters on video cameras are indeed most often used as do-nothing protectors for lenses.

Sandwiching a UV filter between the camera's main lens and a lens attachment such as the WD58 offers no protective value whatsoever.

if you want filters with your wd-58 or century wide angle..you should look at the century optics sunshade

you'd also have to get square filters

Thanks Ken, that is what I needed to know.

Alan, a good link, thanks also.