Why do you use the 3x more than the 16x?

If you shoot normally indoor or dramatic films, any wideangle is handier because of its aspect. You can get more in. You can frame more dramatically. Also handy for events.

Dylan....Any idea what price those adapters are going for at Canvision?

I used to know, but I've since drank those brain cells away.

Does the Canon 3x have focus hunting problems when it's on manual?

John -- I've used one quite a bit and have never known it to have this problem.

The only thing I have noticed with the 3x is that it is considerably softer than the manual 16x I have. I would like to ask if anyone else has noticed this, because if they haven't I will take my 3x to be serviced...
Thanks lots,


Kai.

I use and like the Century 0.6x adapter. I think I've posted on it here before.

Is it possible to use the .7x with the 3x lens? If so, what would be the focal length?

Most certainly you can. The focal length on its own is 3.4 to 10.2 so a 0.7x wide-angle converter takes that down to 2.38 to 7.14mm. Very nice indeed.

tom.

What is the equiviance in 35mm?

About 17mm. The conversion factor for 1/3 inch chips is 7.2X.

I'll second on the .6x century. I have it for use with my manual 16x lens. It's around $300, and it's supposedly 40% wider than the stock lens.

Cons that I've noticed are:

Have to buy a matte box if you want to hood it

No zoom (except with ISII lens and auto focus

Some fisheye-ing around the edges

Ive noticed with my .7x century optics, considerable distortion. It seems to squish things horizontally. Im a bit disturbed by this. Has anyone else had similar problems?

I don\'t notice a squish so much as a bending of vertical edges, near the edge of the frame. Depending on the shot, sometimes less noticeable than others.