That should be fine...the thing to remember is that the better the image going in regardless of format, the better the result. Even an SD image will improve with the best possible optics.

Pieter, it is known that the H version of that lens has a matched resolution for the HV20 while the earlier version will soften the image when used on that camera. It's not just a renaming of the same piece of glass. I can't give you quantitative numbers nor resolution charts, but that is the word that I have heard through Canon channels. I had the same conversation with the Century Precision folks, who have a 43mm SD wide angle adaptor but said there's no point in even trying it on the camera as it defeats the purpose.

Charles, thanks, that's clear language. Still I think I'm going to be a little bit stubborn and try first :))

Certainly worth trying, as it may be "good enough" depending on what yardstick you use. I've never been one to insist on shooting resolution charts and ripping apart test images--if I like the look of a camera, I use that camera! My recommendation would be to shoot a demanding scene with lots of detail (make sure there is something with fine lines if you don't have a chart) without the adaptor, then with--make sure to set the field of view of both shots to as close as you can so it is a fair comparison. Probably easiest to compare stills taken with the camera as they will represent the highest possible resolution.

If anyone is interested - BH has the WD-H43 in stock. Its part #2072B001. It is on thir site as a WD-43.

Rapo

Just received my WD-H43 from Zotz Digital today (where I also bought my camera). They are one of our site sponsors here, and I thought I'd give them a try. I got great personalized service and the prices are very competitive. Give Brian a call at Zotz for a quote if you are considering buying online.

How do you know this is the WD-H43 and not just the regular old WD-43? It looks like it is the stock SD lens and we are all waiting on the HD version.

Peace.

FYI: Some of you may have seen this in another post. Here is a test in which I used the HV20 and convertors on some of the shots, both telephoto, and wide. The wide is a .7 x Kenko on a 58mm mount, I bought to use with my VX2000. As Charles says, you can judge for yourself whether it does well enough. Telephoto is a 58mm mount Sony HG 1.7x I also bought for the VX2000. I have used it on my FX1 too, though I could only use it a full telephoto because of vignetting. At full telephoto, I notices some red fringing on the dark birds.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=XL96FDZ0

Just to reiterate, I have in my hands the WD-H43 from Zotz Digital. They have it in stock.

I had been asked to provide stills of the WD-H43. Here they are. The last one is the "well-dressed HV20" with H43 and DM-50 mike onboard.

The last two are frames from the camera itself showing field of view with and without the adaptor. Clearly there is a bit of barrel distortion as to be expected with a wide angle adaptor (there's even a touch of it on the shot without the adaptor!)

The adaptor is quite heavy compared to the body, it adds up to a bit of a handful (you'll want to use two hands to operate). The center of gravity is pushed up to the somewhere around the manual focus button, i.e. a bit over an inch from the front of the camera!

Can someone also give some advice on a pistol grip for the HV20?

Pretty impressive difference. Thanks Charles! This is exactly the shots I had hoped to see.

Hi Charles -
Am I correct in thinking that ceiling/wall line is straight in real life? Seems like quite a lot of "barrel distortion" offhand, bordering on fisheye. Nice field of view overall though!

DB>)

Whats the best way to protect the large glass element at the front of the WD-H43? The photos don't seem to show filter threads!



Jim

Dave:

Sure hope the ceiling is a straight line, we just remodeled last year!!

Yeah, that's a worst-case scenario that I put up, purposely so that you can see the amount of distortion. For most types of shots this won't be as noticeable of course. Wide angle adaptors tend to do this--I have compared the Canon adaptor for the A1 with the 6x wide zoom on the H1, and there is much more distortion with the adaptor.

James:

Being careful is the best way to protect the adaptor! I suppose it would be possible to tape a good quality clear filter to the front (it would have to be a larger diameter to avoid vignetting) but consider that most pros forego filters to maintain the best optical quality and just take extra care; and that this is a "relatively" inexpensive adaptor to begin with so a calamity wouldn't be nearly as painful as, say, scratching the front element of the built-in lens.

In terms of the added mass, I am finding that using the left hand to support the camera from underneath with thumb and forefinger resting against the collar of the wide angle is pretty comfy, and relieves quite a bit of strain on the right hand (which has to work pretty hard to hold the camera level as all of the weight is offset to the left). This also frees up the index finger of the right hand to operate the zoom more comfortably. This works equally well with and without the adaptor onboard.

I just tested the field of view between the still function on the camera and the video side of things. The still side sees quite a bit more than you would get shooting video, thus the barrel distortion is not as pronounced for the video frame (and you will not see as wide an image) because it is not using the edges of the lens where distortion is more pronounced. Hope this helps!

Based on the mfg part # "2072B001" I googled, and found some sort of canon dealer parts site. It says its "Wide-Converter WD-H43 High-def compatible Wide Conversion Lens..."

Rapo

The H and non-H versions are easily discernable by their appearance:
H: http://www.preistrend.de/img/picts/I189771.jpg (see also the photo's by Charles)
Non-H: http://216.25.78.123/pics/canon/7151a002.jpg

I happen to own the non-H and intend to try it on my HV20 as soon as it arrives. Charles wrote

Eye is king, I always say. I intend to pull some frame grabs with-and-without the adapter through a Photoshop hi-pass filter as a measure of sharpness. To be continued!

--OT: that is some impressive theatre setup you got there Charles! :o

hv20 sunshade?
 

last week, i saw a photo of an hv20 w/ either a black telephoto or wide angle lens attached w/ a sunshade. i'm trying to find that photo but no luck. also, any suggestions on a sunshade? i'll be using mainly the canon wide angle adaptor. thanks.

Enea, is the audio supposed to be very soft on the ATR25? I changed batteries just to be sure but it sounds like its only a quarter as loud as the built in mic for the HV20. When hooked up to a PC I expected it to boom or produce a lot of noise but it doesn't.

That's strange. No it's not supposed to sound weak. I just ran a quick test again and even though my old Panasonic 3ccd has got already very clean and quite loud audio output, the range, quality and the volume as well dramatically improved with the AT25. I remember that I even had to adjust (turn down) the audio gain in the camera, as the AT25 sometimes rendered the sound too loud and a little bit distorted. But that was happening only in extreme situations, for example when I shot rock concerts and got to close to an amp/speaker. As I use my cam as a deck for editing (firewire passthrough), I always have it hooked up to a Technics stereo amp and the footage recorded with the AT25 is very loud, when volume on the amp is set to level one (on a scale to 10).

I even used the mic one for Skype, directly connected to the PC and the quality and volume were excellent.

BTW, I only use high capacity NiMH rechargeable batteries, don't know what you used. But it should work as well with standard alkaline batteries.

Really an odd thing. I suggest you run some more tests, try a different battery type and adjust the in-camera audio settings. But maybe there's simply something wrong with the mic, as mine have definetely quite a high output.

Enea,

Tried the ATR25 again with the two plug cable, the single-mini plug and changed to the maxell alkaline, sound came in soft but clean. It's slightly louder than last night (subjective, I was tired) but is not as sensitive as the built-in microphone (probably not a bad thing since it's clean, just seems like it achieves this by softness?). I'm thinking the screw in connector may be hit/miss as it appears to be hooked up to the battery spring and bounces when I plug it in.

Here's a sample from a quiet room. There's a laptop with an audible cooling fan humming about 2-3 feet (~1 meter) from the camera. The HV20's mic picks it up quite a bit while the ATR25 only records my voice.


In 16-bit WAV (3.26MB):
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=XKQ6KGYK


In MP3 (680K):
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=XKQ6KGYK

Does it sound right to you?


Charles,

Maybe you could post a sample of the DM-50's sound?

I use the ATR25 on my Panasonic GS250 and it works fine. I tried to use a rechargeable battery and it did not work, but a regular AA is fine. I used it at this air show with great results: http://www.socalspeedzone.com/ptmugu...w07/index.html

When I get a HV20 I am thinking of getting the Canon DM-50 but I try the ATR25 first. Would if it would be much better?

I just repeated your test with my camera, with almost the opposite result. Audio recorded with the ATR25 was a bit louder, clearer and had a wider frequency response.

I analyzed your test file in WaveLab and noticed that the ATR25's sound was about 10-12 db more quiet than the in camera sound. This is really strange. Either there's something wrong with the mic or the HV20 compensates for the ATR25's higher output.

As soon as I have my HV20 (hopefully next week), I'll repeat the test with the ATR25.

I'm terribly sorry for having recommended something you're not satisfied with. I really hope it's not a HV20 compatibility problem (as stated above).

I have the DM-50 on the way to see how it does. When adjusting menu items with the joy stick you can hear the clicking action in the on-camera mic. Though I don't normally adjust anything while recording, it would be nice to have the mic up and away from the body so if I want to tick the exposure up or down I (hopefully) don't interfere with the audio. Then again, adjustments still shake the camera video as well, so that might be moot.

The battery placement is awkward for using an XLR adapter 9aking to bottom loading DV tape mechanisms), so I am looking for options there as well. Have a couple Lenmar batteries coming with an plug-in charger.

Also have the tele-converter coming to give that a try. Haven't bee able to find anyone with the wd-h43 in stock, but that is on the list as the camera doesn't shoot wide enough for the landscape video I normally do.

Aside from the added mic, a few batteries, the tele and wide converters, I'm interested in a 35mm adapter and a basic steadycam. I would think the first are required and the latter is desired though.

Enea, I'm happy to say that swapping out for a new ATR25 did the trick. I'm enjoying good audio pickup without the camera hum (I do a lot of video in quiet places) now. Next step is to figure out how to mount it. Modify the shoe or buy a brace? Hmmm ....

Thanks John, I bought an old C-8 43 from that auction place and I'm pleased to report that it works excellently (only in my first day of ownership at the moment for the HV20 though!). You are correct that it only works properly with the zoom set to full wide (I guess this is a focus point issue).

Great money-saving tip though!

Andrew

Thanks for posting these photos. I'm curious how this setup has been working for you? Does the DM-50 mic work well in most situations? Close indoor and far away outdoor use? Do you have any sample videos using the WD-H43?

Thanks

I'd be interested in any feedback on this (I'm just a Home Vid Shooter) but after I month of using the HV-20 want if possible a stero mic that is just a "step up" from the internal mic:
1) Small, Cheap, Easy to Use
2) Cuts down on Wind & Motor Noise

Any other suggestions would be welcome
Thanks
Nathan

Canon HV20 and Canon DM-50 shotgun mic
 

I actually bought the DM-50 and used it on a recent trip to Alaska. I'll try to post some clips of it up on the web. My initial impression is it did a pretty good job. I haven't yet listened to the audio captured to my computer though. Anyhow I love that it uses no wires and is powered by the hot shoe. Anyhow when I get some clips up on the web I'll post a link here.

A nice, compact, super easy to use mic, but definitely not "made" for the DV20. They've been around for quite a while. I bought one when I first got an Optura Pi (5 or 6 years ago?), and I think it was probably around before the Pi.

Canon DM-50 Microphone
 

Well I bought this mic a few months ago and have shot quite a few videos with it. I'm pretty happy with the quality. I would def. recomend it. I love not having to carry around extra cables or batteries!

C-8 43 and C-8 67
 

Any idea how much of a Wide Angle this ? i.e. 0.7 or 0.65 etc..
This is not mentioned anywhere....