Anyone have a crystal ball? at DVinfo.net

Marco Leavitt · October 28th, 2003, 05:54 PM

Can anyone hazard a guess as to whether camcorder manufacturers will retain the 58 mm filter size on the next generation of cameras? I'd like to continue buying adapters, but I'm afraid they'll be worthless once I make the jump to HD. Also, would current adapters be able to resolve enough lines to even make it worthwhile putting them on an HD camcorder?

Jeff Donald · October 28th, 2003, 06:05 PM

Filter sizes change all the time. There is no standard for sizes. That's why you have multitude of sizes now.

Joe Sacher · October 28th, 2003, 06:12 PM

With the many wide angle adaptors and other 58mm threaded devices that are much more expensive than filters, I would think that it would be a good idea for manufacturer to do keep to this size, unless there is a very good reason not to.

Marco Leavitt · October 28th, 2003, 06:27 PM

I guess I meant "filter threads." I wasn't referring to the filters themselves.

"I would think that it would be a good idea for manufacturer to do keep to this size, unless there is a very good reason not to."

Unless you're a manufacturer of adapters. :)

Joe Sacher · October 28th, 2003, 08:25 PM

That is true. However, when people don't buy your camera because it isn't compatible with their current accessories, then what do you do? :)

Jeff Donald · October 28th, 2003, 09:03 PM

I don't base camera purchasing decisions on filter sizes. I've got some old tires in my garage, so I should buy a car that fits the tires?

Frank Granovski · October 28th, 2003, 09:09 PM

You can always use a conversion ring.

Marco Leavitt · October 29th, 2003, 07:58 AM

"I don't base camera purchasing decisions on filter sizes. I've got some old tires in my garage, so I should buy a car that fits the tires?"

I don't think the analogy holds. In this case, it's the camcorder that's the disposable technology. You could easily spend more on quality fisheyes and telephoto adapters from a company like Century. It would be nice to be able to continue using them with successive generations of equipment. My brother's Nikon 35mm SLR camera will still accept Nikkor lenses made 30 years ago.

Jeff Donald · October 29th, 2003, 10:14 AM

Thirty year old Nikor lenses, optically don't perform up to today's standards. Sell the WA adapters filters etc. when yo usell the camera. Basing camera decesions around your accessories is not the best way to pick a camera.

Joe Sacher · October 29th, 2003, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Thirty year old Nikor lenses, optically don't perform up to today's standards.

They may not be top dog, but they will still do a great job. Not everyone wants to play the upgrade game with all the accessories when they change cameras. Not everyone has a need for the latest coated piece of glass.

I don't think filter ring size is the only factor in deciding which camera to buy, by any means. But, what about this:

I now need a new camera. I have $1000 tied up in 58mm filters and lenses. These are pretty new (5 years old or less) and perfectly servicable.

Brand A and Brand B both have cameras that do what I want. Brand A decided to use a 58mm lense and Brand B changed to a 68mm lense. Step down adaptors will not work, because of vigenetting. All else being equal, I will go for Brand A.

It will be a deciding factor, albeit a small one, in purchasing decisions.

Marco Leavitt · October 29th, 2003, 11:10 AM

In any case, the dilemma for me right now is whether to continue buying adapters, seeing as how I'm still shooting with a GL1 and would likely purchase one of Canon's next generation cameras if they release them next year. I really don't think native 16:9 is too much to ask, but that's another gripe altogether.

October 28th, 2003, 05:54 PM	#1
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Anyone have a crystal ball? Can anyone hazard a guess as to whether camcorder manufacturers will retain the 58 mm filter size on the next generation of cameras? I'd like to continue buying adapters, but I'm afraid they'll be worthless once I make the jump to HD. Also, would current adapters be able to resolve enough lines to even make it worthwhile putting them on an HD camcorder?

October 28th, 2003, 06:05 PM	#2
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Filter sizes change all the time. There is no standard for sizes. That's why you have multitude of sizes now. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

October 28th, 2003, 09:03 PM	#6
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	I don't base camera purchasing decisions on filter sizes. I've got some old tires in my garage, so I should buy a car that fits the tires? __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

October 29th, 2003, 10:14 AM	#9
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Thirty year old Nikor lenses, optically don't perform up to today's standards. Sell the WA adapters filters etc. when yo usell the camera. Basing camera decesions around your accessories is not the best way to pick a camera. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

October 28th, 2003, 06:12 PM	#3
Joe Sacher Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 177	With the many wide angle adaptors and other 58mm threaded devices that are much more expensive than filters, I would think that it would be a good idea for manufacturer to do keep to this size, unless there is a very good reason not to.

October 28th, 2003, 06:27 PM	#4
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	I guess I meant "filter threads." I wasn't referring to the filters themselves. "I would think that it would be a good idea for manufacturer to do keep to this size, unless there is a very good reason not to." Unless you're a manufacturer of adapters. :)

October 28th, 2003, 08:25 PM	#5
Joe Sacher Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 177	That is true. However, when people don't buy your camera because it isn't compatible with their current accessories, then what do you do? :)

October 28th, 2003, 09:09 PM	#7
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	You can always use a conversion ring.

October 29th, 2003, 07:58 AM	#8
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	"I don't base camera purchasing decisions on filter sizes. I've got some old tires in my garage, so I should buy a car that fits the tires?" I don't think the analogy holds. In this case, it's the camcorder that's the disposable technology. You could easily spend more on quality fisheyes and telephoto adapters from a company like Century. It would be nice to be able to continue using them with successive generations of equipment. My brother's Nikon 35mm SLR camera will still accept Nikkor lenses made 30 years ago.

October 29th, 2003, 11:10 AM	#11
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	In any case, the dilemma for me right now is whether to continue buying adapters, seeing as how I'm still shooting with a GL1 and would likely purchase one of Canon's next generation cameras if they release them next year. I really don't think native 16:9 is too much to ask, but that's another gripe altogether.