Wide Angle Adapter

Gabriel Selmi · July 13th, 2004, 07:03 PM

I have the exact same lens and I noticed that when I zoom all the way to the end the picture gets slightly soft and little color distorted. When I lower the zoom the picture is as mentioned above wonderful. Is this a defect in my camera lens of am I zooming to far out? I was very interested in hearing how well the lens performed for others but am concerned I am not getting the same results with my 2100. Any input is welcomed.

Dave Largent · July 15th, 2004, 12:39 PM

About $300.

Gabriel Selmi · July 24th, 2004, 07:43 PM

I have a Sony VCL-HG0758 58mm 0.7x High Grade Wide Angle lens attached to my VX-2100. I notice that when I zoom all the way to the end the picture gets slightly soft and little color distorted. When I lower the zoom the picture clears and returns to normal focus. I have done several experimements using all the manual controls available with the same resilts. Has anyone noticed the same symtoms or is this a defect in the wide able lens of zooming to far in? Without the wide angle lens the camera funtions and records very good. Any input is welcomed.

Ray Echevers · July 24th, 2004, 08:29 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Gabriel Selmi : I have a Sony VCL-HG0758 58mm 0.7x High Grade Wide Angle lens attached to my VX-2100. I notice that when I zoom all the way to the end the picture gets slightly soft and little color distorted. When I lower the zoom the picture clears and returns to normal focus. I have done several experimements using all the manual controls available with the same resilts. Has anyone noticed the same symtoms or is this a defect in the wide able lens of zooming to far in? Without the wide angle lens the camera funtions and records very good. Any input is welcomed. -->>>

Most wide angles and fisheyes get "soft" or even completely blurred when zoomed in to a certain point.
I've noticed too that it depends on the camera.
I've seen the same lens act differently on different cameras.

Tom Hardwick · July 25th, 2004, 12:40 AM

I think the point to bear in mind Gabriel is that you've bought a wide-angle converter for increasing your wide-angle coverage. If you can use it at other focal lengths that's a bonus, but I haven't found one yet (regardless of price) that doesn't degrade the image slightly. If you want to shoot at 30mm it's better to take the w/a converter off (though of course more hassle).

tom.

Gabriel Selmi · July 25th, 2004, 05:17 AM

Thanks for the replies, I am more comfortable knowing these results are somewhat consistant. Could I have got something other than a convertor that would produce better results?

Mike Rehmus · July 25th, 2004, 10:40 AM

Unfortunately, only a pro camera with removable lenses. Then the very wide angle pro zoom lens can cost more than $25,000.

Nick Hope · September 21st, 2004, 02:20 AM

I find the widest angle of the VX2K to be insufficient for a lot of work so I've started using a Canon 0.7x wide converter with it.

Despite keeping everything nice and clean I'm noticing a lack of sharpness, particularly in subjects more than a few metres away. In fact it's such that I'm even considering using my old Panasonic DX100 for some shots as that has a wider angle than the VX2K without the lens. But I'd rather not!

Is this loss of sharpness to be expected? Is there anything I can do about it?

Mike Rehmus · September 21st, 2004, 09:44 AM

My Century does the same. I sent it back to them for evaluation. They said it is normal.

I use it only sparringly because of that.

Gints Klimanis · September 21st, 2004, 03:02 PM

Yeah, I noticed the same with my Canon 0.7x wide angle converter, which I bought after my Raynox 0.66x exhibited the same. The Raynox is pretty nice, but really goes soft when the VX2000 is at maximum zoom, regardless of focus. I've been experimenting with underexposure
by using f/stops around f/4 for my particular available light. I do not know what is the sharpest f-stop over the zoom range. Using a smaller aperture seems to yield better clarity with the Canon wide angle, although I have not quantified the results.

Both Mike and I were involved in another thread that's somewhat related :

VX2000 : best lens sharpness aperture?
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32105

Mike Rehmus · September 21st, 2004, 04:42 PM

In general, any auxiliary lens is going to negatively affect the image quality. Most aux lens are formulated to a general spec and not for a specific camera & lens combo. So they won't be as good as they can be and almost never as good as a prime lens at the same magnification.

Tom Hardwick · September 22nd, 2004, 08:53 AM

Mike's right in that there's no free lunch. But my tests of the Century 0.65 bayonet and the Raynox 6600 PRO show them to be staggeringly close to the camera when used without them.

I set up the VX on a sturdy tripod and filmed perpendicular to a brick wall, sending the images to Memorystick. I used lots of different apertures and recorded all the results. I then attached the wide-angles and zoomed up so that the camera's view was the same. I then imported these images into Photoshop for a good A/B look-see.

This is an excellent test to find out what adding 3 extra elements to the Sony's line-up does for resolution, contrast, colour balance, vignetting and distortion. I was impressed by how subtle and small the changes were. Better to use slightly smaller apertures like f5.6 and 8 when you have the converter on I find.

Zoom to full wide with the converter on does harm chromatic aberations, but in general the sharpness holds up well, and I've been slightly surprised by the words I read above.

tom.

Mike Rehmus · September 22nd, 2004, 09:03 AM

I found the Century 0.65 bayonet to be such a disappointment that I sent it back to Century for a quality check. I t performed similarly on both of my PD150's . . . such a noticable softening that I don't like to intercut footage from the same camera with and without the adapter. Century said it works normally.

I find it softens the image by an unacceptable amount and I only use it when I must.

Gints Klimanis · September 22nd, 2004, 02:15 PM

>Better to use slightly smaller apertures like f5.6 and 8 when you have the converter on I find.

Thanks, Tom. I noticed a big gain in sharpness when opening to f/4. In the future, I'll try the settings you list above.

Jakub Pankowski · September 24th, 2004, 03:13 AM

I had canon xm2 with canon 0,7x wide lens and didn't notice EVER lose of sharpness and resolutino on any disortion using wide lens attached in any situatin either using wide or tele. Now I've got PD-170 with this sony 0,7x lens (comes as a bundle) and must say that this is very irritating disortions and lose of sharpness using tele. It means that guys from sony must lern a lot about engineer a really good lens in their camera. It's not about the wide lens You have attached but about the original lens You have got in Your camera PD-170 or VX2100. It just can't work well with wide conversion lenses. Saying that: "You've got wide conversion lens to do wide shots" is really stupid - imagine taking it off every single time when you want do do some details close ups to achieve good quality picture. :)

July 24th, 2004, 07:43 PM	#273
Gabriel Selmi Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 30	Sony Wide Angle View I have a Sony VCL-HG0758 58mm 0.7x High Grade Wide Angle lens attached to my VX-2100. I notice that when I zoom all the way to the end the picture gets slightly soft and little color distorted. When I lower the zoom the picture clears and returns to normal focus. I have done several experimements using all the manual controls available with the same resilts. Has anyone noticed the same symtoms or is this a defect in the wide able lens of zooming to far in? Without the wide angle lens the camera funtions and records very good. Any input is welcomed.

July 24th, 2004, 08:29 PM	#274
Ray Echevers Regular Crew Join Date: May 2004 Location: Somerville, MA Posts: 148	Re: Sony Wide Angle View <<<-- Originally posted by Gabriel Selmi : I have a Sony VCL-HG0758 58mm 0.7x High Grade Wide Angle lens attached to my VX-2100. I notice that when I zoom all the way to the end the picture gets slightly soft and little color distorted. When I lower the zoom the picture clears and returns to normal focus. I have done several experimements using all the manual controls available with the same resilts. Has anyone noticed the same symtoms or is this a defect in the wide able lens of zooming to far in? Without the wide angle lens the camera funtions and records very good. Any input is welcomed. -->>> Most wide angles and fisheyes get "soft" or even completely blurred when zoomed in to a certain point. I've noticed too that it depends on the camera. I've seen the same lens act differently on different cameras. __________________ Sony VX-1000 G5 1.8 dual 91 Turbo MR2

July 25th, 2004, 10:40 AM	#277
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Unfortunately, only a pro camera with removable lenses. Then the very wide angle pro zoom lens can cost more than $25,000. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

September 21st, 2004, 02:20 AM	#278
Nick Hope Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Bangkok, Thailand Posts: 189	VX2000 loss of sharpness with wide converter I find the widest angle of the VX2K to be insufficient for a lot of work so I've started using a Canon 0.7x wide converter with it. Despite keeping everything nice and clean I'm noticing a lack of sharpness, particularly in subjects more than a few metres away. In fact it's such that I'm even considering using my old Panasonic DX100 for some shots as that has a wider angle than the VX2K without the lens. But I'd rather not! Is this loss of sharpness to be expected? Is there anything I can do about it?

September 21st, 2004, 09:44 AM	#279
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	My Century does the same. I sent it back to them for evaluation. They said it is normal. I use it only sparringly because of that. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

July 13th, 2004, 07:03 PM	#271
Gabriel Selmi Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 30	I have the exact same lens and I noticed that when I zoom all the way to the end the picture gets slightly soft and little color distorted. When I lower the zoom the picture is as mentioned above wonderful. Is this a defect in my camera lens of am I zooming to far out? I was very interested in hearing how well the lens performed for others but am concerned I am not getting the same results with my 2100. Any input is welcomed.

July 15th, 2004, 12:39 PM	#272
Dave Largent Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,483	About $300.

July 25th, 2004, 12:40 AM	#275
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I think the point to bear in mind Gabriel is that you've bought a wide-angle converter for increasing your wide-angle coverage. If you can use it at other focal lengths that's a bonus, but I haven't found one yet (regardless of price) that doesn't degrade the image slightly. If you want to shoot at 30mm it's better to take the w/a converter off (though of course more hassle). tom.

July 25th, 2004, 05:17 AM	#276
Gabriel Selmi Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 30	Thanks for the replies, I am more comfortable knowing these results are somewhat consistant. Could I have got something other than a convertor that would produce better results?

September 21st, 2004, 03:02 PM	#280
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	Yeah, I noticed the same with my Canon 0.7x wide angle converter, which I bought after my Raynox 0.66x exhibited the same. The Raynox is pretty nice, but really goes soft when the VX2000 is at maximum zoom, regardless of focus. I've been experimenting with underexposure by using f/stops around f/4 for my particular available light. I do not know what is the sharpest f-stop over the zoom range. Using a smaller aperture seems to yield better clarity with the Canon wide angle, although I have not quantified the results. Both Mike and I were involved in another thread that's somewhat related : VX2000 : best lens sharpness aperture? http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32105

September 21st, 2004, 04:42 PM	#281
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	In general, any auxiliary lens is going to negatively affect the image quality. Most aux lens are formulated to a general spec and not for a specific camera & lens combo. So they won't be as good as they can be and almost never as good as a prime lens at the same magnification. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

September 22nd, 2004, 08:53 AM	#282
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Mike's right in that there's no free lunch. But my tests of the Century 0.65 bayonet and the Raynox 6600 PRO show them to be staggeringly close to the camera when used without them. I set up the VX on a sturdy tripod and filmed perpendicular to a brick wall, sending the images to Memorystick. I used lots of different apertures and recorded all the results. I then attached the wide-angles and zoomed up so that the camera's view was the same. I then imported these images into Photoshop for a good A/B look-see. This is an excellent test to find out what adding 3 extra elements to the Sony's line-up does for resolution, contrast, colour balance, vignetting and distortion. I was impressed by how subtle and small the changes were. Better to use slightly smaller apertures like f5.6 and 8 when you have the converter on I find. Zoom to full wide with the converter on does harm chromatic aberations, but in general the sharpness holds up well, and I've been slightly surprised by the words I read above. tom.

September 22nd, 2004, 09:03 AM	#283
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	I found the Century 0.65 bayonet to be such a disappointment that I sent it back to Century for a quality check. I t performed similarly on both of my PD150's . . . such a noticable softening that I don't like to intercut footage from the same camera with and without the adapter. Century said it works normally. I find it softens the image by an unacceptable amount and I only use it when I must. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

September 22nd, 2004, 02:15 PM	#284
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	>Better to use slightly smaller apertures like f5.6 and 8 when you have the converter on I find. Thanks, Tom. I noticed a big gain in sharpness when opening to f/4. In the future, I'll try the settings you list above.

September 24th, 2004, 03:13 AM	#285
Jakub Pankowski Tourist Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: London Posts: 1	I had canon xm2 with canon 0,7x wide lens and didn't notice EVER lose of sharpness and resolutino on any disortion using wide lens attached in any situatin either using wide or tele. Now I've got PD-170 with this sony 0,7x lens (comes as a bundle) and must say that this is very irritating disortions and lose of sharpness using tele. It means that guys from sony must lern a lot about engineer a really good lens in their camera. It's not about the wide lens You have attached but about the original lens You have got in Your camera PD-170 or VX2100. It just can't work well with wide conversion lenses. Saying that: "You've got wide conversion lens to do wide shots" is really stupid - imagine taking it off every single time when you want do do some details close ups to achieve good quality picture. :) __________________ Always Unhappy?