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'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.

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.

>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.

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. :)

"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"

Jakub,
I use the same setup and agree with you 100%.
In fact, the Canon wide adapter stays on the camera full-time (unless I should really need the tight end of the standard lens.)

Robin

<<<-- 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. :) -->>>

Well that's what I have to do. It's inconvenient but do-able.

My Telesor .5X wideangle lens, with a 58mm thread, gives sharp, undistorted images on any camcorder I have. There's no vignetting at any zoom setting. Although I bought it 17 years ago for
$160., it's as though it was made to order for my VX2100. I'd recommend it as
an excellent performer and great buy for the VX and PD-series cameras. If you have good luck and find someplace you can buy them nowadays, let me know, as I'd like to pick up another as a spare.

Steve McDonald

You claim to have a 0.5x zoom through wide-angle converter that doesn't suffer from distortion Steve? Sorry, but I simply don't believe you - much as I'd like to.

If you set up your camera + converter perpendicular to the side of a building, are you claiming that there's no distortion of any of the straight lines (windows, doors, brickwork)?

tom.

filters for 170 wide angle lens...
 

anyone know of any - mainly uv to protect lens....

leslie

There is always a way although I don't use one on the WA I use for my 150 since there is no filter thread on the beast.

An email to B&H Photovideo should get you an answer.

thanks mike,

neither does the sony supplied w/a with the 170 have any thread. my main concern is obviously protection rather than filtering.

was even thinking about a piece of optical perspex on the lends hood?

all the best,

leslie

I know you mean well Leslie, but unless you're going to (rough) sea in a sailing boat or photographing children's boisterous parties I'd not bother with a UV over the w/angle converter. And this from a man who advocates that you wear one at all times in front of your standard zoom lens, simply as mechanical insurance protection.

The Sony w/angle will be a three element converter and this adds to the flare on your film of course. Making it intop a 4 elemet only adds to the problem. On top of that the increased DOF means that added filters have to be kept spotlessly clean - a near impossibility - or the marks show up on film.

I use a good rubber hood from Cavision, and at least this keeps some of the rain and sticky fingers away.

tom.

I too use a rubber hood. The lens hood from my RB-67 6 by7 cm film camera fits perfectly.

Wide Angle?
 

Can anyone recommend the Century Precision Optics 0.65x converter lens for the PD-170 versus the Canon WD-58?
Is the bayonnet version preferable to the screw on?
Thanks for any advice.
Bob

Bob, there has been a ton of information on those WA adapters. Do a search on the term 'wide angle adapter,' and you will get 19 threads on the subject.

Bayonet mount is much stronger than filter-thread mount.

Simple Question: do I need the Sony sunshade with the VCL58 wide angle?
 

I've read and read, but I don't know if I need the Sony LSFS58 hood with the Sony VCLHG0758 wide angle lens.

It sounds like the hood is a replacement...

Do I need it?

Yes......to prevent flaring.

I'm not sure, I'm checking out that one and it sures looks like a replacement. I'm wondering if Lou just answered without actually checking that model out, it would be good to know as i could use on myself..

Not sure what hood the Sony LSFS58 hood is, but in purely photographic terms YES - you do need a lens hood, and doubly so when you're using a wide-angle. Your focal length has been reduced to 4.5 mm and if you focus close and use f8 or so, the depth of field can come inside the front element of the converter. Any dust or dirt - however slight - will come into sharp focus and become horribly apparent if direct (sun)light hits the front element.

Hooding the glass and shadowing it from the sun can dramatically improve your shots. It's very easy to prove - all you need is a sunny day, a TV as a monitor and a hood. Take it on and off and see what I mean.

The lens hood is the cheapest, lightest (here he goes again) best accessory you can buy for the money. Don't leave home without one. Remember too that the hood that came with your VX/PD is only efficient at the max wide-angle end of the zoom - for all other focal lengths it 'sort-of-helps', no more.

tom.

What hood would you suggest when using the sony wide angle lens?

Thanks,
Scott

The best hoods are aspect-ratio hoods (rather than cilindrical ones) If you shoot in 16:9, aim to get a 16:9 hood. Cavision sell some good ones that clamp onto the outside of the w'angle barrel.

tom.

I have the Sony LSFS58 hood with the Sony VCLHG0758 wide angle lens. The LSFS58 looks just like the stock VX2000 lense hood but it is bigger, comes apart, and lets you keep your wide angle lense on all the time. This is exactly what I wanted. It's kind of minimal as a lense hood, but it's so convenient that that's what I use all the time.

Is there any reason to get a sunshade over a cheap (ie Formatt) matte box ?

Sony wide angle adapter clips upper left and right corners?
 

Hello there -- another question from a relative newcomer.

I have a pd 150 and a Sony vcl-mhg07 wide-end conversion lens. 0.7.

For some reason, when I put on the conversion lens, the upper left and upper right corners of the picture seem to be clipped -- at least when I am fully zoomed out.

If I zoom in a bit, the clipping goes away (or falls off the edge of what is viewable on the screen).

But why does it clip in the first place? And is there any way to eliminate this problem?

Thanks!

Albert Wong


PS. This is what I have on the camera:
UV protector 58 mm
58 to 52 mm adapter ring
Sony vcl-mhg07 wide-end conversion lens X0.7.

Re: Sony wide angle adapter clips upper left and right corners?
 

PS. This is what I have on the camera:
UV protector 58 mm
58 to 52 mm adapter ring
Sony vcl-mhg07 wide-end conversion lens X0.7.

And that is exactly your problem. You have an undersize lens on the camera and it is bound to vignette at fully wide zoom. You will have to restrict your zoom which is hard to do or obtain a properly sized WA adapter lens for the camera.

If I may add,

I had the exact same problem when using the Sony .7 wide angle lense WITH a UV protector. Once I removed the UV protector and attached the lense, no more vingetting / clipping!

Thanks again for the response!
 

Thanks for the response, Mike! -- maybe not the response I wanted to hear :-( but the truth is ultimately better, isn't it.

And, Brian I will definitely give it a shot without the UV filter -- if I can figure out how to twist it off! :-) it's on really tight!

Thanks again, guys.

Albert Wong

Put a rubber band around it first. The reason they don't come right off is that when you squeeze them to get a good grip, you distort the threads.

Thanks for the tip :-) -- (and I thought I was going to have to start working out of the gym! :-) )

Don't forget that if you vignette the image as seen in the viewfinder / side-screen, then the full frame (as seen on your pc monitor and as see on the wall if projected) will show far more vignetting.

Worse is to come. If you have Steadyshot turned on and move the camera at all the vignetting will increase. The answer is to use a 58 mm w'angle converter and remove all filters between converter and camera zoom.

tom.

Tom --

oh no :-(

(And I thought I was done with new purchases for a while... ooopf)

I guess I'm going to have to start making more money so I can get more toys! :-)

Albert

Good news:

Just an update -- it turns out that without the 58 mm UV filter -- I get no "vignetting" at full wide! --

Thanks everyone.

Sony Wide Angle Lens quality?
 

Just wanted some input on how others feel about the included WA lens with the PD170. I know from some of the other posts in the past many people feel its inferior to some of the other $500 - $600 lenses on the market...but how inferior do you think it is compared to the others - if any at all? How many people even use a WA?

I would be using it mainly for weddings, and I've used mine a few times around the house (i've only had the cam for about 2 weeks). It really doesn't seem very sharp, especially the more I zoom; but I don't want to spend another 5 or 6 hundred if the others don't make a huge difference. The fuzziness may just be my imagination anyway after reading the other posts.

First you have to understand that any of the WA attachment will go soft as you zoom in. You are far better off walking in to the subject than zooming.

I have both a Century Optics and a KenkoPRO for my 150s and I actually use the KenkoPRO more for a number of reasons (some are stupid) First on my monitor with my eye I have never seen a HUGH difference in the quality. Mind you I said a HUGH difference. Of course there is a difference but not enough for my clients to notice, heck, other video guys (and gals) I am friends with have a hard time seeing the difference. The Century is a tad sharper but they both have very littel fall off on the corners but again the Century has just slightly less.

As for the Sony lens, well, it's not bad. It's probably on par with the Kenko or Optix.

As for when you'll use it, I use it when I can't get the shot any other way. Especially during the reception when the dance floor is crowded. I have always liked walking the floor with the camera overhead. It can be a bit dangerous but hey thats why we get the big bucks right!?

I've used it on occassion for ceremonies-a very small chapel and sometimes outdoors depending on where I set up.
Use the right tool for the job and the job becomes a lot easier.
HTHs
Don

Thanks, Don

...very good clarification and since it's not a huge difference, I guess I'll stay with the sony WA. No reason to throw money away when I can be spending on something else I really need.

Actually, the Sony .75 lens is a real quality piece of glass, and if you are having a problem with sharpness, there may be a problem. This lens is what is known as a "zoom through" which means it will hold focus through the entire length of the zoom range. There are other less expensive lens adapters that will only allow you to zoom through a portion of the range before they go out of focus. But you should have no problem with the Sony. The major problem with the lens is the additional weight, and the large front element is a real flare catcher. You might want to invest in a hood for it, or a "Flarebuster," from www.flarebuster.com.

Many shooters find the wide angle indispensible, and leave it on the camera all the time. If you are certain you have a focus problem with it, you should have the camera and lens looked at by a qualified tech.

Wayne Orr, SOC

no wayne,
I'm not certain - and the more I read, the more I think its in my head. I've just seen so many posts that say the Century Optics or the Canon or this or that is light years better than the included Sony WA.

From my perspective, I don't want to have a great camera with an add on lens that makes the shots worse than without it. If thats the case, Id rather take the thing off until I can get a quality one.

Brandon,
While the Sony may not be quite as good as Century Optics there is nothing wrong with it. If it was a piece of junk Sony would be stupid to include it as no one would use it and everyone would piss and moan about how bad it is, so all in all I say use it and have fun with it.

As for the "focus" problem keep a couple of things in mind. 1st-anytime you add more glass in front of the prime lens things sometimes "look" different-softer, and 2nd, as Wayne stated, the lens is a zoom thru but as I said before when you push any WA to its far limits it will look a bit soft on the long end. If you need to do that kind of zooming in then either don't use the lens OR walk in on the subject if possible. Like I said, even my Century Optics WA goes a bit soft on the long end of the zoom.

The WA attachment can be a complete bust or the greatest thing since sliced bread IF you understand that it is another piece of glass in front of the prime lens, it will go somewhat soft on the long zoom and might cut off the corners a little bit BUT it will get you shots that you might not get otherwise or will let you get a BETTER shot than you might have gotten without it.

Use the Sony in good health,
Don

thanks for the advice Don - well taken.