There are mixed feelings about using anamorphics. First off you won't be able to focus so close and you'll lose a lot of wide-angle (though you'll gain a bit from the amamorphic itself - which is a wide-angle converter in the horizontal plane only). Your side-screen and viewfinder will both be distorted (horizontally compressed images) and this will take some getting used to if you're not using a 16:9 monitor while shooting. You'll get more flare and you'll need a good 16:9 hood.

On the plus side you'll beat the 16:9 of the PDX10 hands down. You'll be confident that the next camera up that's just noticeably better costs 3x as much. But remember this - 16:9 footage is less backwards compatible than 4:3. Older TVs will show it distorted and I find (doing lots of weddings a year) that if I shoot 4:3 then they can show it on whatever TV they like - the TV remote control can squeeze it, push it, bend it, shape it anyway they want it. Hey - this sounds like a song from the Small Faces in the 1960s.

tom.

How so?

Gosh, where do I start? Low light sensitivity (3.5 stops better) more wide-angle, better DOF control, know what aperture and ND you're shooting with. much less CCD smear, longer battery life, 6 bladed diaphragm and reliable 'display' info. But then it's a lot more money, weight and bulk...

tom.

I see how those factors could add up to give better overall picture quality but just comparing widescreen to widescreen the PDX10 is of higher resolution than a VX2000/VX2100 with an anamorphic adapter.

Hi there I am practically new here, I would like to purchase a camcorder mainly for short films, and am considering mainly the pd170.
how does the 170's 16:9 hold, would anyone who shoots in this mode with the 170 for a competition be crazy do you feel that an anamorphic adapter is the way to go?
I have been reading reviews all over the place. some say that the panasonic dvx100 is the way to go if you want to do films. but the 100 and 170 are very close to colour reproductions and so on.
could anyone suggest me the way to go? sort of I feel that although the pana is a later technology the sony is still very good.

Tommy, I'm sure you're right - though I haven't done the test myself to confirm. But your words, "those factors could add up to give better overall picture quality" hit the nail on the head. Picture quality comes from a whole host of disciplines, a few of which I listed. It reminds me that some Hifi buffs in the 80s used to think that a flat frequency response was the be and end all of Hifi. Open reel tape deck manufacturers went to great pains to pump out decks that were flat from 20 to 20k, often at the expense of other - far more important parameters.

Cars too are made to perform well in the 0 to 60 test, regardless of the fact that this can give gearing not best siuted to modern driving. I feel Sony have gone this route slightly with the PDX10. It does indeed give wonderful picture quality, but out there in the real world, where the light levels vary, you need a camera that makes more level headed compromises.

tom.

I agree Tom.

What scared me is how much I would be willing to pay for a native 16:9 VX2000!

:)

Tom: thanks for that reply. You make a good point regarding backwards compatibility. But I'm not sure that showing a 4:3 production on a widescreen TV isn't just as bad ... either you get the gray/black bars on the sides, which is unsatisfying, or you get the picture unnaturally stretched to fill the 16:9 dimensions ... which is what most people will probably do, whether they realize it or not. To me either looks terrible, but I guess if the client doesn't mind ...

unfortunately we're in the middle of a transition and there's no decent solution other than to wait until 16:9 becomes the norm for consumers.

Majors problems with the Century Optics 16:9
 

On reading these forums, and a couple of others, my company and I each purchased the Century Optics adapter for the PD170 cameras. On multiple cameras this adapter seems to cause focus problems, with much soft focus, and an inability to find the focus even on manual. This adapter has caused nothing but problems. Has anyone else had these problems? I haven't seen anyone report about it online.

My second posting down in this list describes what you've found Jonah, that using an anamorphic brings a solution but also brings problems.

Don't forget that you're adding a cylindrical element in front of your camera's lens and this in itself is designed to distort the image. You're shooting with more distortion in the hope that the TV will correct this later.

It does work, but it demands that you curtail the zooming and the close focusing and accept a distorted viewfinder. These are big prices to pay in my book, and we haven't even started talking about the big price up front or it's weight and the light loss. In a side-by-side comparison on a good big 16:9 TV the anamorphic footage will look better, but this is like saying the PDX10 gives better widescreen footage than the VX2000. Yes, it does in controlled conditions, but out there in the real run 'n' gun world, it most certainly doesn't.

tom.

<<<-- Originally posted by Tommy Haupfear : I agree Tom.

What scared me is how much I would be willing to pay for a native 16:9 VX2000!

:) -->>>

Well then, a DSR-570WS should be ok then, right? :-))))

I guess I should have put a spending cap on that dream sequence. :)

How good is the century optics 16x9? Anyone actually got one?

it works well but with so many limitations (specially into zoom) that the price make it really an expensive for the few lines you save by using it.
Frankly if you can afford for another solution it worth to try.

Their products are great, but very pricey.

I'm using the Century 16:9 adapter on a Sony PD150P. Together with a mattebox and 4x4 filter holders the setupp is a quit god one.

The adapter has its limitation. You can't zoom outside of the 1/4 and 3/4 range. I use to zoom only from the 1/3 to the 3/4 max. The picture quallity is much more like "film" . Not film but it is more soft.

A note - You have to be very careful in run & gun scenarios where you are trying to focus using the small lcd and time is against you. I've had some footage where the bg was in focus and the subject in foreground was not.

The LCD isn't good enough to focus in most situations, especially compared to the viewfinder or an external monitor.

I have the Century anamorphic and really like it. I find that it doesn't really interfere with the autofocus on my GL1. I even shot a wedding reception with it. No focus problems whatsoever. On manual you can zoom in, let the autofocus make its best guess, put it back on manual and zoom out and you will have a very sharp picture. An external monitor would be very nice with this adapter, but it's not 100 percent necessary if you can deal with its quirks. I never shoot with the zoom at more than a quarter of the zoom range with this adapter, so there are definitely some limitations.

Has the PD170 nativ 16:9?

Century optics has a 1.33 anamorphic adapter with full zoom. Has someone tested on a PD150?

I guess a combination of the Century 16:9 with the Century 75 mm telelinse is a god solution. The tele adapter is for the Canon but fits on the 16:9 adapter. I could help with the shallow focus.

The Century zoom through adapter is a bit of a mystery. Nobody seems to have ever seen one, and B&H has listed it on back order ever since the thing was announced a year or so ago. I’m not convinced Century has ever shipped any. Been meaning to call and ask them about that.

I’m also curious to know how well the Panasonic anamorphic performs with cameras that have 58 mm threads, like the GL2 and VX2000. Anybody tried it?

Interesting comment about the “tele adapter” from Century. Are you referring to the 1.6x tele-converter? Have you tried it? How do you mount it? Would love to see some screen shots.

No, I didn't have any tele converter but.... look at this:

http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/filmstylePD150.html and the link to Century : http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/prodv/65-75/16x_tele-converter/index.htm

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=142095&is=REG

I guess the adapter is from the DVpro list.

-------------------

How do you add a link here?

Pretty neat. I've always wanted to try piggy backing a wide angle adapter. I wonder if that's the Century zoom through? It looks like it could be the regular Century anamorphic.

Yes , it is a regular 16:9 and a WA on the picture. But if it works than it has to work with the tele converter. More tele -> more shallow focus.

I am planning on buying a Optex 16:9 adaptor, and a Century Optics Mattebox. Does the matte box have enough room on the bars to mount a 16:9 adaptor lens between it and camera lens?

Yes, I guess. But take a look at this:

http://www.cavision.com/Mattbox/4x4ClampOn.htm

it is better and cheaper as I know.

Anamorphic adapter fully zoom through?
 

Is there such a thing as a fully zoom through anamorphic adapter for the PD170? From the posts I searched, the Century Optics adapter does not seem work well at extreme tele and wide.

Are there any other manufacturers that produce quality anamorphic adapters for the Sony PD170 that work at any focal lengths in auto focus? Also, is it possible to screw on wide angle or telephoto adapters? Or am I just dreaming?

Century's new anamorphic is fully zoom through, but hard to get. You can buy one from them, but at retail. Nobody else seems to be able to keep it in stock. DV Mag recommends the Panasonic, which is between the price of the top end and lower end Century adapters. At this stage, I'd probably stick with the original Century. You can get good used deals.

I just purchased mine from B&H in NY. They didn't have it in stock, but if you sign up for the Notify Me When In Stock, you will get a pretty quick reply.

Hope that helps

Cheers

Really? I think you are officially the first person on these boards to have reported even seeing one. How do you like it?

No, it's not possible to use supplimentary wide-angle and /or telephoto converters when you use an anamorphic. You could use a close-up lens though.

tom.

Several years ago I asked Century about adding a wide angle adapter to the anamorphic and was told by one of their techs that some people used a clamp-on adapter ring to mount one of their professional wide angles. She didn't seem to think it was a very good a idea, but people were definitely doing it. I agree about the close-up lens. I've tried both a drop in lens and Series 9 dual element achromatic and they both work surprisingly well, but only at a very precise distance. It significantly extends the zoom range too, but after doing a few tests, it doesn't appear to extend the range quite as much as I had once thought.

Me am like the anamorphic adapter alot... ALOT... ALOT I SAY!!!

I put my name on the notify list at B&H and within two days got an email saying it was available for purchase. It arrived a few days later. I've had it for about two weeks now.

I spent an afternoon shooting with it, the wide angle adapter, normal mode, and the fake 16:9 the camera does to compare. Wide angle adapter and anamorphic are no comparison, but the anamorphic compared to the fake 16:9 is a blessing. It looks so much more clear when viewed on my Sony Pro Monitor in the edit bay.

The only bad thing is making sure you get the lens lined up correctly. There were a few shots where the rotating lens was not perfectly perpendicular. The shots look okay, but you can tell there is a slight wonkyness to them.

Other than that... ALOT I SAY!!!

Cheers

I found it's a lot easier to get the lens aligned after putting on the sunshade -- the bottom edge gives you a nice long line that you can align with the bottom of the camera. Of course, that's assuming you got it on the adapter right. I'm dying to come up with a reason to rotate the lens while shooting. A drug sequence maybe? You can get pretty funky effects.

DS-WS13-SB 1.33 Anamorphic Converter
 

Hi,

Thinking of getting one of these:

http://www.centuryoptics.com/pdf/CpPD170.pdf

anyone had any experience of using one?

bryan

People have been asking about this lens every couple months for the past year, however nobody here has ever seen one. There is some doubt as to whether it's actually a shipping product. On B&H's website they list it as both "out of stock" and "special order" http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...namorphic+1.33

Also note that it costs $1,300...

I know this was for the PD170. However I have a couple PD-150 cameras, and wanted to do a 16:9 ana for it. Are they available for the 150, if so what other accessories would I need to purchase to make it perfect..

Thanks much

patrick

I believe there is a bayonet version for the PD170. They also make a 58mm threaded version.

Any one version better over the other? Sorry for the noobness, in the last 8 months I have been introduced and inducted into doing camera work..

Any places to purchase, model numbers, anything will help.. :)

I've never believed in bayonet mounts because you can only use them with one model of camera. Why not get the threaded version? They're only moderately less convenient, are easier to sell, and are more likely to be compatible with future equipment. Keep in mind though, that I almost never remove our anamorphic, so it may be less of an issue for me than for people who constantly need to switch back and forth between aspect ratios.