Wide Angle Adapter

Frank Granovski · March 26th, 2003, 12:16 AM

I know nothing about the Canon except that it doesn't have filter threads. The Sony is made by Kenko, and is basically the same as the Kenko Pro, except that the Sony doesn't have filter threads, whereas the Kenko Pro does. Plus, for the lack of the treads, Sony charges extra for this. Go figure. Century also makes adaptors for the VX2000, but no filter threads.

David Hurdon · March 26th, 2003, 05:52 AM

Despite owning the Canon WA-58 my experience isn't sufficient to qualify me as the answer source, but my reading over many months echos what I've come to believe, that the Canon is a great piece of glass for the money. I understand it now comes in a kit form complete with lens hood.

Ram Nagarajan · March 26th, 2003, 07:34 AM

Joe:
I've used the Sony once, and I own the WA-58 Canon. I can say the Canon is an exceptional WA adapter - smooth zoom through with no distortion and/or aberrations at either end of the zoom range (no vignetting, no fall-off, no nothing). David is correct, it now comes with a lens hood thrown in as part of the kit. The lack of filter threads can be a nuisance, but hey, you can't have it all! :-)
Hope this helps...
Ram

Rick Spilman · March 26th, 2003, 10:18 AM

I bought a Sony WA adapter for my VX1000 and a Canon WA adapter for my PD150.

I like the Canon better. The Sony vinettes far more easily. I find I can stack two filters behind the Canon without problems. The Canon is an excellent value for the money.

Mike Rehmus · March 26th, 2003, 10:54 AM

I wouldn't think the design would allow for filters between it and the camera lens. At best there must be some type of distortion even if not readilly detectible.

Rick Spilman · March 26th, 2003, 11:11 AM

I see your point. Nevertheless, I have succesfully used a polarizer between the adapter and camera. The footage looked good. There may have been distortion but I couldn't see it.

Tom Hardwick · March 26th, 2003, 01:11 PM

Of all the wide-angle converters I've tested on the VX2k, the only one I'd tell you to avoid is the Cavision 0.5x. This gives quite unacceptable image blurring at the edges whatever aperture is used and on top of that it vignettes the frame in all four corners.

The Century 0.65x with its breech-lock bayonet is a beauty (as it should be at the price) though it distorts too much for such an expensive optic in my view. The Tecpro 0.5x I'm testing at the moment is quite remarkable. It's every bit as sharp at all apertures and focal lengths as the Century, but is just over a quarter the price. It's not as nicely coated so needs careful hooding, but it comes in PD150 colour - so guess where it's aimed?

It has a very concave front element and the lens unscrews to leave behing a verty powerful (and rather distorting) +8ish diopter close-up lens. Worth a look I'd say. Distorts straight lines yes - but then it's a very powerful 0.5x widie.

tom.

Boyd Ostroff · March 26th, 2003, 01:58 PM

Haven't used the Canon, but I have the Sony and am pleased. I did some shots of a test chart with and without the adaptor and couldn't notice any difference in focus or distortion. Have never noticed a zoom or vignetting problem either, although I can't claim to have scientifically analyzed it. But the other comments about lack of threads, etc are true.

Matt Stahley · March 26th, 2003, 03:15 PM

My 2 cents.I know Ihave far less shooting experience then most here but i own the Canon for my VX2k with the lens hood and i would have to agree with the other Canon owners.A great lens for the money. i have noticed no difference in image with or without the lens as far as focus etc is concerned.i do know the lens hood makes a huge difference as far as lens flare goes as it should so I would recommend that plus it may help some it protecting the lens.
Optex also makes a high quality .65 bayonet mount available from www.zgc.com.

Lou Bruno · March 28th, 2003, 05:48 PM

I have the Canon WD-58. Great lens for the money. Just got the new Canon Lens Shade. Works excellent and looks PRO!!

Edward Rich · March 30th, 2003, 08:28 AM

I just got the Sony for $201.00. Works great, a bit large but thats not a problem. Anyone know if there is a lense shade for this monster?

Boyd Ostroff · March 30th, 2003, 10:38 AM

Regarding a lens shade, here's a re-print of something I posted awhile ago...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Poor man's wide angle lens shade

I've been using a Sony .7x wide adaptor on my VX-2000 for awhile and have generally been happy, but have wanted some sort of lens shade to use with. Not ready to pony up hundreds of $$$ on a matte box (yet :-), I came across a simple, durable, inexpensive solution that might interest others.

At my local Ace Hardware I bought a rubber pipe reducing coupling. This is a heavy black rubber fitting that uses hose clamps to join two different sized PVC or iron drain pipes. The 3" to 4" adaptor was just about the right diameter for the Sony .7x lens. I cut some excess rubber off the 3" end with a utility knife and made some small slits so it would fit over the lens more easily, then used the supplied hose clamp to attach it to the lens. After mounting on the lens I observed the amount of vignetting, then trimmed the excess rubber from the 4" end.

The result was something that looked much more like a piece of photographic equipment than a sewer pipe connection, and it works perfectly. Total cost was about $5.00 and it took maybe 15 minutes. Take a look in the plumbing section at your local hardware - the model I bought is the 3" to 4" adaptor #PCX 56-43.

Wayne Orr · March 30th, 2003, 12:50 PM

Boyd certainly gets the design award for his "plumber's helper," but if Edward has a bit of mad money, he might contact Cavision for a professional lens shade for his Sony. Well made product for around $100.00. This will also provide protection for the lens, and makes a very professional appearance for your PD150. www.cavision.com.
Another less expensive add on is the Flarebuster. This is a "french flag" device that was designed for still camera use, but is even more helpful on a video camera. They include the flag, but its the mount you are after, then you will probably want to make your own flag out of black foamcore from any art store. The Flarebuster costs about $25.00 and is the real deal. You will find other uses for the Flarebuster, such as using it as a handy prompter. Clip on notes on a 3x5 card and twist it to face the talent. www.flarebuster.com.

Couple of other notes. The Sony does not have filter threads, but where do you find 4" screw in filters? Any additional glass added to the front of this large front element will be problematic. Unless you add a very serious matte box.

The Sony is very sharp and barrel distortion is minimal. The problem is that large front element, along with the price. But it is quality glass. I would like to know where Frank G. got his information that it is manufactured by Kenko.

The Canon is a good deal for the price, but it does go a bit soft at the longer focal lengths.

Whichever one you choose, a wide angle lens should be one of the first optional purchases for the VX2K and the PD150.

Boyd Ostroff · March 30th, 2003, 02:52 PM

Wayne, I was just looking on the cavision website. Exactly which model sunshade works with the Sony lens? There don't appear to be any prices on the site either.

Wayne Orr · March 30th, 2003, 04:37 PM

Yeah, Boyd, here is the link to the sunshade. http://www.cavision.com/LensHood/LH100w.htm
I believe they also have a model that has a filter slot, if you are interested. I would suggest you call John Anthony at Cavision direct at 604-681-6621 and ask him for a price quote in U.S. dollars with shipping, so you won't be surprised. Ask him if it includes the soft cover. Not a big deal.

March 26th, 2003, 05:52 AM	#77
David Hurdon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 484	Wide Angle Lens Sony vs. Canon Despite owning the Canon WA-58 my experience isn't sufficient to qualify me as the answer source, but my reading over many months echos what I've come to believe, that the Canon is a great piece of glass for the money. I understand it now comes in a kit form complete with lens hood. __________________ Site:http://www.faceliftmarketing.ca Blog:http://www.websitevideo.blogspot.com

March 26th, 2003, 10:54 AM	#80
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	I wouldn't think the design would allow for filters between it and the camera lens. At best there must be some type of distortion even if not readilly detectible. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

March 28th, 2003, 05:48 PM	#85
Lou Bruno Go Cycle Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Huntington, NY Posts: 815	I have the Canon WD-58. Great lens for the money. Just got the new Canon Lens Shade. Works excellent and looks PRO!! __________________ Lou Bruno

March 30th, 2003, 12:50 PM	#88
Wayne Orr Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Northridge Ca Posts: 734	Boyd certainly gets the design award for his "plumber's helper," but if Edward has a bit of mad money, he might contact Cavision for a professional lens shade for his Sony. Well made product for around $100.00. This will also provide protection for the lens, and makes a very professional appearance for your PD150. www.cavision.com. Another less expensive add on is the Flarebuster. This is a "french flag" device that was designed for still camera use, but is even more helpful on a video camera. They include the flag, but its the mount you are after, then you will probably want to make your own flag out of black foamcore from any art store. The Flarebuster costs about $25.00 and is the real deal. You will find other uses for the Flarebuster, such as using it as a handy prompter. Clip on notes on a 3x5 card and twist it to face the talent. www.flarebuster.com. Couple of other notes. The Sony does not have filter threads, but where do you find 4" screw in filters? Any additional glass added to the front of this large front element will be problematic. Unless you add a very serious matte box. The Sony is very sharp and barrel distortion is minimal. The problem is that large front element, along with the price. But it is quality glass. I would like to know where Frank G. got his information that it is manufactured by Kenko. The Canon is a good deal for the price, but it does go a bit soft at the longer focal lengths. Whichever one you choose, a wide angle lens should be one of the first optional purchases for the VX2K and the PD150. __________________ Wayne If it was easy, they'd get a relative to do it.

March 30th, 2003, 04:37 PM	#90
Wayne Orr Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Northridge Ca Posts: 734	Yeah, Boyd, here is the link to the sunshade. http://www.cavision.com/LensHood/LH100w.htm I believe they also have a model that has a filter slot, if you are interested. I would suggest you call John Anthony at Cavision direct at 604-681-6621 and ask him for a price quote in U.S. dollars with shipping, so you won't be surprised. Ask him if it includes the soft cover. Not a big deal. __________________ Wayne If it was easy, they'd get a relative to do it.

March 26th, 2003, 12:16 AM	#76
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I know nothing about the Canon except that it doesn't have filter threads. The Sony is made by Kenko, and is basically the same as the Kenko Pro, except that the Sony doesn't have filter threads, whereas the Kenko Pro does. Plus, for the lack of the treads, Sony charges extra for this. Go figure. Century also makes adaptors for the VX2000, but no filter threads.

March 26th, 2003, 07:34 AM	#78
Ram Nagarajan Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: New Delhi, India Posts: 107	Joe: I've used the Sony once, and I own the WA-58 Canon. I can say the Canon is an exceptional WA adapter - smooth zoom through with no distortion and/or aberrations at either end of the zoom range (no vignetting, no fall-off, no nothing). David is correct, it now comes with a lens hood thrown in as part of the kit. The lack of filter threads can be a nuisance, but hey, you can't have it all! :-) Hope this helps... Ram

March 26th, 2003, 10:18 AM	#79
Rick Spilman Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Jersey City, NJ Posts: 366	I bought a Sony WA adapter for my VX1000 and a Canon WA adapter for my PD150. I like the Canon better. The Sony vinettes far more easily. I find I can stack two filters behind the Canon without problems. The Canon is an excellent value for the money.

March 26th, 2003, 11:11 AM	#81
Rick Spilman Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Jersey City, NJ Posts: 366	I see your point. Nevertheless, I have succesfully used a polarizer between the adapter and camera. The footage looked good. There may have been distortion but I couldn't see it.

March 26th, 2003, 01:11 PM	#82
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Of all the wide-angle converters I've tested on the VX2k, the only one I'd tell you to avoid is the Cavision 0.5x. This gives quite unacceptable image blurring at the edges whatever aperture is used and on top of that it vignettes the frame in all four corners. The Century 0.65x with its breech-lock bayonet is a beauty (as it should be at the price) though it distorts too much for such an expensive optic in my view. The Tecpro 0.5x I'm testing at the moment is quite remarkable. It's every bit as sharp at all apertures and focal lengths as the Century, but is just over a quarter the price. It's not as nicely coated so needs careful hooding, but it comes in PD150 colour - so guess where it's aimed? It has a very concave front element and the lens unscrews to leave behing a verty powerful (and rather distorting) +8ish diopter close-up lens. Worth a look I'd say. Distorts straight lines yes - but then it's a very powerful 0.5x widie. tom.

March 26th, 2003, 01:58 PM	#83
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	Haven't used the Canon, but I have the Sony and am pleased. I did some shots of a test chart with and without the adaptor and couldn't notice any difference in focus or distortion. Have never noticed a zoom or vignetting problem either, although I can't claim to have scientifically analyzed it. But the other comments about lack of threads, etc are true.

March 26th, 2003, 03:15 PM	#84
Matt Stahley Major Player Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Waynesboro, PA Posts: 648	My 2 cents.I know Ihave far less shooting experience then most here but i own the Canon for my VX2k with the lens hood and i would have to agree with the other Canon owners.A great lens for the money. i have noticed no difference in image with or without the lens as far as focus etc is concerned.i do know the lens hood makes a huge difference as far as lens flare goes as it should so I would recommend that plus it may help some it protecting the lens. Optex also makes a high quality .65 bayonet mount available from www.zgc.com.

March 30th, 2003, 08:28 AM	#86
Edward Rich Tourist Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Sterling Heights, Michigan Posts: 2	I just got the Sony for $201.00. Works great, a bit large but thats not a problem. Anyone know if there is a lense shade for this monster?

March 30th, 2003, 10:38 AM	#87
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	Regarding a lens shade, here's a re-print of something I posted awhile ago... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Poor man's wide angle lens shade I've been using a Sony .7x wide adaptor on my VX-2000 for awhile and have generally been happy, but have wanted some sort of lens shade to use with. Not ready to pony up hundreds of $$$ on a matte box (yet :-), I came across a simple, durable, inexpensive solution that might interest others. At my local Ace Hardware I bought a rubber pipe reducing coupling. This is a heavy black rubber fitting that uses hose clamps to join two different sized PVC or iron drain pipes. The 3" to 4" adaptor was just about the right diameter for the Sony .7x lens. I cut some excess rubber off the 3" end with a utility knife and made some small slits so it would fit over the lens more easily, then used the supplied hose clamp to attach it to the lens. After mounting on the lens I observed the amount of vignetting, then trimmed the excess rubber from the 4" end. The result was something that looked much more like a piece of photographic equipment than a sewer pipe connection, and it works perfectly. Total cost was about $5.00 and it took maybe 15 minutes. Take a look in the plumbing section at your local hardware - the model I bought is the 3" to 4" adaptor #PCX 56-43.

March 30th, 2003, 02:52 PM	#89
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	Wayne, I was just looking on the cavision website. Exactly which model sunshade works with the Sony lens? There don't appear to be any prices on the site either.