The BIG wide angle Lens adapter shootout! [Archive] - Canon HV20, HV30 & HV40 User Forum

Mal

2007 May 29th, 07:32

Okay, because this is such an important issue, I've taken it upon myself to do a shootout with some wide angle lens adapters.

I'll post results here in this thread.

Although I think there might be other such comparisons already made, I'm just too curious and want to see this for myself.

So far I have a few lenses on order, and it might take several weeks to get them all in and to complete the tests.

Currently, this test will involve:

- CANON WD-H43 (approx. $200.00 USD)
- CANON WD-43 (approx. $135.00 USD)
- Raynox HD6600 (approx. $120.00 USD)
- cheap Japanese lens (approx. $25.00 USD)

Mal

2007 May 29th, 07:33

(placeholder for test results)

Mal

2007 May 29th, 07:33

(placeholder 2 for test results)

Mal

2007 May 29th, 07:33

(placeholder 3 for test results)

Mal

2007 May 29th, 07:34

(placeholder 4 for test results)

Mal

2007 May 29th, 08:28

(placeholder 5 for test results)

Rico

2007 May 29th, 09:58

What a fantastic thing to do, Mal I just want to thank you for setting this place up, it's really cool.

Rikki

2007 May 29th, 16:00

I'll hate you if he H43 doesnt win by a mile since I invested in one LOL

BarnOwl

2007 May 29th, 16:40

Can't wait, any idea when you start the test?

Lunchbox

2007 May 29th, 16:45

Mal, you are awesome!

Mal

2007 May 29th, 16:51

I'll hate you if he H43 doesnt win by a mile since I invested in one LOL

:hv20-smilie77:
I am really thinking it will. I will be very surprised if it doesn't, but am looking forward to see the results myself.

Should start in a week or so...

Goose

2007 May 29th, 18:13

Brilliant MAL - thanks for doing this

Im hoping the cheapo one wins as I'm getting poor with this hobby! ;)

24Peter

2007 May 29th, 22:34

I'm sure the WD-H43 will come out on top. But I think we'll be surprised how well some of the other adapters do...

Yann

2007 May 30th, 11:08

http://www.hv20.com/showpost.php?p=3154&postcount=14

SuperSean23

2007 May 31st, 16:02

i bet the wd-h43 and wd-43 are gonna be close. Any takers?

crewe1000

2007 May 31st, 16:09

i bet the wd-h43 and wd-43 are gonna be close. Any takers?

I hope not! I hope the extra money makes a big difference.

SuperSean23

2007 May 31st, 16:17

haha i hope they are, i havent bought an wd-h43 yet

Mal

2007 May 31st, 16:21

Well, I've received three lenses already but I can't get hold of a WD-H43.

David, you still got that offer going?

NEED WD-H43!!!!!

Anyone???

hizbiz

2007 May 31st, 20:11

Well, I've received three lenses already but I can't get hold of a WD-H43.

David, you still got that offer going?

NEED WD-H43!!!!!

Anyone???

You might try zotzdigital.com. They might have one and they are canon authorized dealer.

NurburgRinger

2007 June 8th, 09:11

Maybe Canon has instructed resalers not to send you a WD-H43 lens, because the difference between it and the $100 cheaper 43 isn't significant? ;)

Looking forward to the shootout as well - thanks for doing this!

Kurt
HV20 owner

sp8ce07

2007 June 8th, 10:37

Lets do a partial shootout. With what you have now.

Mal

2007 June 8th, 10:40

Lets do a partial shootout. With what you have now.

Lets NOT! :hv20-smilie84:

This test will only make sense if all lenses are compared using the same settings/charts/lighting/scenes. I plan to do this test in one go, as I haven't got time to revisit the test again, once the WD-H43 arrives.
And the WD-H43 is really the lens to which the others need to be compared to; so, unfortunately, my test has to wait until I get a WD-H43...

BarnOwl

2007 June 8th, 11:42

I agree with you.
But I just couldn't live without a wide angle anymore so I purchased the Raynox HD 6600. So far I am very happy with this lens.
If the WD-H43 turnes out to be a lot better I just sell it again...........:hv20-smilie03:

Karel

2007 June 8th, 12:24

I might be interested...(if the price is right...) :hv20-smilie03:

24Peter

2007 June 8th, 12:49

Mal - where are you located? (PM me).

neolinski

2007 June 9th, 16:07

*fujative*

2007 June 12th, 22:16

so which one won?

PWHerman

2007 June 13th, 04:14

Fujative, are you in Detroit, or a city close-by like Warren? I'm just wondering because I live really close to you, heh.

spiffyman

2007 June 19th, 23:45

So if someone had to get a wide angle lens today and they had to choose between a Canon WD-43 and the Raynox HD-6600 which would you suggest?

The WD-H43 is out of stock right now so isn't an option. I'm also very concerned about the extra weight.

It seems like the WD-43 is the best bet for now until we get the test results.

Correct?

PWHerman

2007 June 20th, 01:13

Mal, you should just do the three you have and let someone with the H43 do a test based on the criteria you specify for the others. I know it won't be the same at all (location, lighting, etc.), but you could always re-test them all again once you DO get the H43 in the "near" future, heh. This isn't a very viable option, but hey...I'm just tryin to help out everyone's undying curiosity here...

~You've got a lot of impatient people on these boards, haha!

BarnOwl

2007 June 20th, 03:59

Correct, even so impatient I already bought a 6600 a while ago........
But nevertheless I am still very anxious to know the differences between the lenses. At least I would think some of the members might be able to sent his Canon WD-H43 to Mal for completion of this test......(Presuming he'll get it back within reasonable time :))

theprophe

2007 June 20th, 13:48

white_2kgt

2007 June 21st, 15:06

Mal, would you consider adding the WD-H46 w/ a setup up ring to your list?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=CAWDH46&is=REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=294241

Even w/ the ring it would be cheaper than the H43 and it's in stock.

DEDFX

2007 June 30th, 18:22

I'd like to know myself

brandonesquire

2007 July 1st, 05:56

Mal

2007 July 1st, 08:54

....still waiting for the WD-H43 to become available....
:hv20-smilie123:

When it does, I might throw in a WD-H46, we'll see.

mrob7

2007 July 21st, 18:55

Does anyone think that it would be possibly to attach some sort of eyepiece that extends out for the viewfinder so that it can be moved up and down and also used while an external mic is attached?

mrob7

2007 July 22nd, 04:12

whoops I meant to start a new topic

spiffyman

2007 July 24th, 16:45

24Peter

2007 July 24th, 16:54

Any update from Mal?

I ordered my WD-H43 from the batch announced as available 2 weeks ago. It's arrived and I'm using it. Now I just want to know if I overspent for the excellent results I'm getting. :)

Mal got his adapter - but has been real busy with other stuff. I'm sure he'll get to the shootout as soon as he can.

BarnOwl

2007 July 24th, 18:16

:hv20-smilie03:
Mal got his adapter - but has been real busy with other stuff. I'm sure he'll get to the shootout as soon as he can.

I hope he isn't shot in the shootout yet............must have a real slow opponent......:eek: :hv20-smilie03:

xcgeek

2007 July 26th, 22:57

Hay Mal
Just bumping this to let you know there are still a few of out there who can't wait for your shootout. We've got the :hv20-smilie72: ready :hv20-smilie03:

Mal

2007 July 29th, 12:42

get ready....

Charles Gerungan

2007 July 29th, 12:50

Okay, I´m ready. :)

mrob7

2007 July 29th, 16:39

Ready

Mal

2007 July 29th, 19:25

Have all lenses here now....just need to find the time for the test.....

Rikki

2007 July 30th, 08:16

Have all lenses here now....just need to find the time for the test.....

How does tomrorow grab you Mal? :D

zeroc

2007 July 31st, 04:47

WOW! this just great... im about to buy some Wide Angle lens and found this shootout....I'll wait for the results before i buy em....

THANKS MAL....

white_2kgt

2007 July 31st, 08:49

Can I make a request for the testing (you may have planned to do this anyway, but I'll ask anyway).

Can you show the same still shot, on a tripod, at full zoom OUT, without the lens, and then put the lens' on, try to include some level item, like the top of a fence (goal is to see if the view is distorted with the wide angle).

Then can you show the same still shot, with the lens' on at 1/2 optical zoom and full optical zoom (to show the distortion during zoom through).

Thanks Mal!

24Peter

2007 July 31st, 11:09

Mal

2007 July 31st, 11:38

24Peter

2007 July 31st, 11:57

Don't have one of those, but one of these:
http://cgi.ebay.com/0-45X-Wide-Angle-Conversion-Lens-with-Macro-37mm_W0QQitemZ170134516094QQihZ007QQcategoryZ11619 1QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

and one of these:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Titanium-0-42X-AF-Super-Wide-Angle-Lens-46mm_W0QQitemZ130121479763QQihZ003QQcategoryZ10687 7QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

Are you getting any vignetting with either of those? The 52mm has none and it's field of view (with the macro lens attached) is identical to the Canon WD-H43. The only issue is the corners soften above 50-60% zoom and get really bad >85% zoom (though the center 50% of the image is still pin sharp so it is kind of a cool effect.)

I'm also going to test out the Merkury Titanium 52mm .45X plus macro. Will let you guys know.

Mal

2007 July 31st, 12:39

Vignetting yes, but only on full wide. They aren't too bad when zoomed in just a tad.

But hopefully all shall be revealed when the tests are done...

Mal

2007 July 31st, 12:41

(though the center 50% of the image is still pin sharp so it is kind of a cool effect.)

Yeah I got one here that does that too; AND it does it on full wide also(!); so it's kind of neat for a special effects lens (lathough it could be done in post of course), but that lens is $60 so it might have some value for someone...

DaFireMedic

2007 July 31st, 13:40

Mal - are you including one of these in your tests? My experience with it has been its pretty good (though I'm not keen on this seller).

http://cgi.ebay.com/Merkury-0-45X-Wide-Angle-Lens-With-Macro-Black-52mm-New_W0QQitemZ250147595125QQihZ015QQcategoryZ106877 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

I just ordered one of these, should be here tommorrow. I'm wondering what the difference is between this one and the Merkury Titanium one.

Mal

2007 July 31st, 13:43

I orderd the merkur one too, just because I am now curious...

DaFireMedic

2007 July 31st, 16:42

I orderd the merkur one too, just because I am now curious...

This guy says good things about it:

http://vettaville.com/canon_hv20_wideangle_lens.htm

I was convinced to try it from looking at his m2t sample clips. From those clips, it looked pretty impressive, especially for a relatively inexpensive lens.

24Peter

2007 July 31st, 16:51

This guy says good things about it:

http://vettaville.com/canon_hv20_wideangle_lens.htm

I was convinced to try it from looking at his m2t sample clips. From those clips, it looked pretty impressive, especially for a relatively inexpensive lens.

This is the Titanium Merkury (for lack of a better way to describe it). I have one of those on order and will report back. (It also has a 67mm front thread filter size.)

The "Black Beauty" Merkury has a 62mm front filter size and doesn't say titanium or high definition anywhere on it. At full wide thru about 50% of the zoom it is indistinguishable from the Canon WD-H43. Above that the corners/edges start to degrade. Little or no CA though. And if you remove the macro lens, the wide angle part turns into a wicked cool semi fisheye. However, it has been very challenging trying to find an adapter ring to attach the wide angle sans macro to the camera. Will explain more later. However, the wide angle alone is only about 25% zoom through.

DaFireMedic

2007 July 31st, 17:13

This is the Titanium Merkury (for lack of a better way to describe it). I have one of those on order and will report back. (It also has a 67mm front thread filter size.)

The "Black Beauty" Merkury has a 62mm front filter size and doesn't say titanium or high definition anywhere on it. At full wide thru about 50% of the zoom it is indistinguishable from the Canon WD-H43. Above that the corners/edges start to degrade. Little or no CA though. And if you remove the macro lens, the wide angle part turns into a wicked cool semi fisheye. However, it has been very challenging trying to find an adapter ring to attached the wide angle sans macro to the camera. Will explain more later. However, the wide angle alone is only about 25% zoom through.

Thanks for the info. I ordered the HD (not titanium) version on Amazon. It is going in my underwater housing at full wide angle only, so its good to hear that it works well at wide angle through 50% or so.

Goose

2007 July 31st, 17:32

I currently have 3 wide angles myself, the sony .7 and the Raynox .66 and .72

could do some comparisons also

Erik Bien

2007 July 31st, 17:45

You mean all this time folks have been turning blue waiting for Mal to post up some comparative tests you guys have been sitting on multiple WA adapters and haven't made a peep?

:hv20-smilie167:

24Peter

2007 July 31st, 18:36

You mean all this time folks have been turning blue waiting for Mal to post up some comparative tests you guys have been sitting on multiple WA adapters and haven't made a peep?

:hv20-smilie167:

Peep. Peep, peep. :hv20-smilie24:

zeroc

2007 August 1st, 05:09

when are getting the results?

Goose

2007 August 1st, 06:27

I put some footage of the Sony lens in the footage section a while ago. Really sharp and minimal distortion, no softness at the edges (52mm thread). The only thing with it is that it isnt zoom through. I havent got any footage with the Raynox .7 but it is zoom through. I do have some with the Raynox HD 6600- pro with and without a polariser which is excellent. I think I will just keep the 6600 as I only need one and sell the other two. If anyone is interested just let me know (the Raynox is as new the sony is used)

white_2kgt

2007 August 1st, 08:43

zeroc

2007 August 1st, 16:12

since the CAnon WD-H43 is out of stock from everywhere...im also thinking of buying the 6600.

Goose, why dont ya upload some footage.

Goose

2007 August 1st, 17:39

Ok guys if I get time I'll take some footage (life is a busy with a 6 month old baby!) The sony wide angle footage is already up and I was very pleased with the sharpness.

I have got some footage of the 6600 but it was taken with a polariser inbetween for the purposes of testing the multi coated CP (turned out really well!) Really I need to shoot some straight lines and close ups etc to demo the 6600 properly.

I can say that the 6600 has very minimal barell distortion and good sharpness too. You can zoom about 8x before it gets soft but it doesnt look unpleasant at all at full zoom whereas the sony just goes out of focus (but is great at full wide). I havent tested the DCR-720 Raynox much yet other than to see that there is more noticable bd but it does stay fully sharp throughout the full zoom. Its actually brand new but since its the cheaper than the 6600 I don't think I will use it. I think I prefer the wider .66 to the .72 also. I will sell the 720 on ebay (bought the 6600 unexpectedly after just getting the DCR-720) If anyone wants to make me an offer let me know (Im not after a great deal) Equally the sony lens is a great stop gap if you are not needing to zoom through and dont want to spend much. (I will be selling the sony too). It worked well for me and I got some great shots of baby :) the 6600 should be all I need although I am interested in hearing MAL's conclusion between the WD-H43 and the 6600.

dsanzz

2007 August 1st, 21:03

Really looking forward to the test. I wish all forums were this good.

Deimos

2007 August 3rd, 11:08

Can't wait to see the results.

I'm about to buy a Raynox 6600, but I should wait... arggh...

zeroc

2007 August 6th, 02:59

wat's goin on here? where's MAL? where are the test results.....

24Peter

2007 August 6th, 12:56

wat's goin on here? where's MAL? where are the test results.....

Genius can't be rushed, right Mal? :hv20-smilie03:

Cumulus

2007 August 7th, 17:09

as i have "cheap Japanese lens", sakar .42x, i am definitely interested in its performance against ... WD-H43. a good thing about my position is i "cannot" lose ;)

btw, here is a comparison of many wide angle lens adapter using VX2000 from David Ruether
http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/WA-converters.htm
interestingly he mentions Raynox HD6600's quality as unacceptable but not other japanese cheap lens adapters

exactly where does he rant about the HD6600?
I can only read "the combination of the Raynox HD6600-58 and Cavision PWA06X77 converters to be not acceptably sharp for most purposes".

Anyone here with first hand experience with the HD6600? Sample pictures maybe?

CU
Markus

xcgeek

2007 August 10th, 11:42

Hey Mal
Any estimate as to when the shootout will happen. I've been holding out for it all summer before making a decision, but I have a trip in a few weeks and need to make a call. If you aren't going to have the shootout done this week, could you at least make a recommendation on your experience with the lenses you have? Which one are you shooting with most often? Thanks, we all look forward to the shootout.

Mal

2007 August 10th, 14:05

xcgeek

2007 August 10th, 14:25

Thanks Mal, I'll go with the WD-H43.:hv20-smilie77:

white_2kgt

2007 August 10th, 21:09

sorry, i'm away right now, and won't get to the shootout for weeks. I'd of done it ages ago, but didn't have the WD-H43 then. Now I have all the lenses, I don't have the time.
I'd suggest the WD-H43 if you have the dough, the HD6600 if you have a little less, or a cheapo 43mm Japanese lens if you are poor! :)

How is the zoom through on the 6600? Also at the 'big' end how does the 6600 compare to the H43 physically? Are they the same diameter? (concerned w/ attaching the Matteblox) Does it have filter threads?

Thanks,
Chad

stoop

2007 August 10th, 22:24

Just received my Raynox 6600 and 52-43mm adapter today (from Alpha Electronics -- highly recommended).

Haven't had a chance to test, but quick hits:

- Does have filter threads (72mm) on front of lens.
- Big, beefy lens gives camera a bit of needed 'heft'.
- Black color is nice.

Out of the box impressions are good, but will post some footage when I have a chance to run through paces.

- Stoop

zeroc

2007 August 12th, 06:20

guys, are we talking about HD-6600 Pro 55mm or 43mm?

just to clear the confusion :D

Nacho

2007 August 12th, 08:24

guys, are we talking about HD-6600 Pro 55mm or 43mm?

just to clear the confusion :D

The HD-6600 Pro 52 is the one recommended by Raynox, but look at this (http://www.hv20.com/showpost.php?p=8604&postcount=29)

I'm about to buy one as well, so I'm also pretty interested!

Enjoy!

Nacho

zeroc

2007 August 12th, 16:46

OK, So wats the best step up ring for HD-6600 Pro 52mm lens?

I tried searching B&H for the RA5243A adaptor...doesnt seem to be there.

CAn anyone help?

zeroc

2007 August 12th, 16:48

Is this one OK for the lens?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=387498&is=REG

Ten Ounce

2007 August 12th, 19:31

The HD-6600 Pro lens that Raynox recommends it the 52mm with the 43mm stepdown adapter. I have the RA5243A adapters for $10. If you're interested just let me know as I haven't added everything to the website yet.

zeroc

2007 August 13th, 00:51

which brand is this RA5243A?

DaFireMedic

2007 August 13th, 03:01

lwm99

2007 August 13th, 05:15

I read that Raynox HD6600 Pro will have focus problem when zoom the HV20 beyond 6x. Do you experience this?

zeroc

2007 August 13th, 06:11

oh boy....Now my intrest of getting the HD6600 is loosing.
Can anyone comment to lwm99 if its true.

zeroc

2007 August 13th, 06:14

If you are still looking for a wide angle lens, you might try the Merkury mentioned earlier in the thread. I just got mine, it was a lot less money than the other alternatives to the WD-H43 that have been mentioned, and seems to perform as well as anything else that I've seen clips from, save for the WD-H43 itself. I'm curious as to where it will place in the shootout.

Just another alternative if money is an issue.

money is not an issue here. I just wanted to knw whether the adaptor (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=387498&is=REG) is OK for the HD6600 lens.

Ten Ounce

2007 August 13th, 08:07

I read that Raynox HD6600 Pro will have focus problem when zoom the HV20 beyond 6x. Do you experience this?

I haven't experienced that with my own lens. Depending on various factors, I can be zoomed out all the way and still be in focus. Maybe if someone is very close to the subject they might have issues focusing, but in normal shooting situations I have not been able to recreate that problem.

BarnOwl

2007 August 15th, 12:38

I read that Raynox HD6600 Pro will have focus problem when zoom the HV20 beyond 6x. Do you experience this?

ANY adapter you screw in front of the original lens will loose some focus, even the best one available.
This is a wide angle adapter meant to shoot wide angles, so why would you zoom in? A WA adapter is not made to be left to stay on the camera all the time, just to shoot wide angles.....

I have used the 6600 for lots of panoramic and interior pictures and it performs very well. You can zoom in but the more you zoom, the more focus you'll lose, this is an optical law. It is not a teleconverter.

The Raynox 6600HD 43 is a very good lens for a reasonable price.

pascalbrown

2007 August 22nd, 17:38

I'm in serious need of a wide angle lens but i'm waiting for this review to be posted before spending my hard earned cash! That and I can't find stock of the Raynox or the H43 anywhere in the UK!

Ten Ounce

2007 August 22nd, 18:11

I'm in serious need of a wide angle lens but i'm waiting for this review to be posted before spending my hard earned cash! That and I can't find stock of the Raynox or the H43 anywhere in the UK!

I can ship the Raynox lenses to the UK if you're interested.

Frank

2007 August 22nd, 18:25

This isn't one of the shootout lenses, but I have a 58mm WD58 which I got for my GL2 and I got a 43mm-58mm adaptor ring to mount it on the HV20 and I am loving it. This lens weighs considerably less than the WDH43 btw.

zeroc

2007 August 26th, 16:11

where is the shootout? I couldn't hold it anymore.

Ordered my Raynox HD6600 today :D

DutchY

2007 August 26th, 17:41

Goose

2007 August 26th, 17:57

If anyone is desperate and wants a cheapish stop gap wide angle I am going to sell my Sony VCL-MHG07 (used) and my Raynox DCR 720 on ebay soon unless anyone on here would like to make me an offer for them?

The Sony lens cost me £25 and i bought it after reading this post:
http://hv20.com/showthread.php?t=966
You can see some of my tests and also my footage here:
http://hv20.com/showthread.php?t=1149 It has a lense cap but no back cap. This one is not zoom through but is a nice big piece of glass!

the DCR 720 is brand new and cost me £17 - used once to test only. It is absolutley fine - just a cheaper version of the HD6600 but is .72 rather than .66 and has no front thread. It comes with a nice plastic case likle the 6600. Its also fully zoom though unlike the 6600! I got it before I managed to get the HD-6600 pro cheap from another source.

So Im looking for £22ish for the Sony and £17 for the Raynox

Cheers

DaFireMedic

2007 August 26th, 18:08

I am interested in getting one of those Merkury wide angle lenses. I see people posting that they bought one for around $30.

To me it seems that it is the B-52W that is sold for around $30, but that the High Definition one, the B-52W-HD, is sold for +/- $50.
They are listed as seperate items on the Merkury innovations website.
(http://www.merkuryinnovations.com/prodshelf.asp?view_all=1&dept_id=100128)

Did you all buy the B-52W-HD or the 'digital' version? What is the difference?
What is a recommended place to buy one?

This is the one that I bought, I believe it is the one that 24Peter has also. It is the CL-52WB High Definition:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000HJ8P2O/104-7646451-6796706

I'm not sure what the difference is on the "Titanium" version that makes it more expensive, only that I am very pleased with the one listed above.

24Peter

2007 August 28th, 12:51

This is the one that I bought, I believe it is the one that 24Peter has also. It is the CL-52WB High Definition:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000HJ8P2O/104-7646451-6796706

That looks like the one I had - though I paid more (off eBay I think). I sold mine recently in favor of the "Digital Concepts" Titanium which was as close to the Merkury Titanium as I could find (besides being silver, the "Titanium" says hi def on it and has a 67mm from thread.)

The black Merkury has 52mm rear threads and 62mm front threads and it is virtually indistinguishable from the Canon WD-H43 through the first 50% of the zoom range. Above that, however, the image starts to degrade - corners get soft - and at full zoom, there's only a small circle in the center that is sharp.

On the Titanium, however, at first I thought it looked pretty good but then I began to notice the left side of the image was often blurry - even at full zoom. I returned the lens for a replacement (still waiting for it) but I'm wondering if that will help since even when I rotated the lens on the camera, the left side was still burry. I also won a 58mm Merkury Titanium wide angle on eBay and am waiting for that to arrive.

zeroc

2007 August 28th, 16:32

Got my Raynox HD6600 lens today. Will upload some pics soon :D

Nacho

2007 September 1st, 17:33

Hi,

I got a wide angle converter zcw-200 from konica minolta after I read this thread:

http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?t=1445

I got it for 11€ on ebay!

My first impression is good! It's small, CHEAP and sharp if you stay under x5 zoom! The image quality is fine, so I'm quite happy with it, will just unscrew it in case I need to zoom :hv20-smilie09:

jonsa

2007 September 4th, 07:15

EXCELLENT SHOOTOUT! :hv20-smilie70:

24Peter

2007 September 5th, 14:16

See my post here for the latest on my tests: http://www.hv20.com/showpost.php?p=17988&postcount=11

grinchy

2007 September 7th, 00:54

For posterity

Directions:
For Dimage Z10 Digital camera set to "wide converter setting" in "lens accessory option" of camera set up menu. Focal length will be set to wide-angle setting. Zoom will be disabled.
If the wide converter is not set in the menu, image quality will deteriorate when the focal length is other than wide angle position
Can be used with a 43mm filter on the front of the camera lens.
Vignetting may occur with an 8mm or thicker filter ring, or with multiple filters

Technical Specifications:
Focal length .7x of camera lens
Aperature same as camera lens
Optical 1 element in 1 group
min focus 33cm from ccd, 25cm from front of converter
min macro distance 8cm from ccd, 0 cm from front of converter
Dimensions (mounted) 54mm Dia x 8.9mm L
weight 30g or 1.1 oz

Can be zoomed up to about 4x. Autofocus is slowed when converter in place, especially for smaller objects.

romagjack

2007 September 9th, 07:43

ANY adapter you screw in front of the original lens will loose some focus, even the best one available.
This is a wide angle adapter meant to shoot wide angles, so why would you zoom in? A WA adapter is not made to be left to stay on the camera all the time, just to shoot wide angles.....

I have used the 6600 for lots of panoramic and interior pictures and it performs very well. You can zoom in but the more you zoom, the more focus you'll lose, this is an optical law. It is not a teleconverter.

The Raynox 6600HD 43 is a very good lens for a reasonable price.
Thanks, Barn Owl. I just ordered the Raynox 43 mm. Sounds great for my purposes. $99 at 47th Street Pnoto.

rhicks

2007 September 10th, 13:14

So can we get some samples of the WD-H43 and Raynox at various zooms? Video would be best but stills would be great also.

romagjack

2007 October 2nd, 07:59

zephyrnoid

2007 October 2nd, 09:21

Sure the 43mm is a smaller more compact optic, but not hugely so! Some folks are willing to opt for the Raynox 7000 which dwarfs the HV20. I own the HD-6600 Pro in 52mm which I bought on ebay for $100. It's fine. I understand the limitations of these optics and know to stay away from certain zoom positions for best results- something you'll have to watch for no matter which "Zoom-through" capable wide you end up with.
This business of waiting for the 43mm specifically is puzzling to me:hv20-smilie51: I'm happy I've had the 6600 while others are still pinning over specific focal lengths here's a recent ebay > Item number: 230175528493

Well, I never received my Raynox hd-6600pro 43 mm and can't seem to find them anywhere in the U.S. Are they discontinued? How much difference would there be using a stepup ring with 49mm or 52mm lenses that seem to be available. I really prefer the 43 and would wait if they are not discontinued. Thanks.

Ten Ounce

2007 October 2nd, 09:35

Well, I never received my Raynox hd-6600pro 43 mm and can't seem to find them anywhere in the U.S. Are they discontinued? How much difference would there be using a stepup ring with 49mm or 52mm lenses that seem to be available. I really prefer the 43 and would wait if they are not discontinued. Thanks.

Raynox recommends getting the HD-6600 in the 52mm size, and then using the 43-52 step up adapter for the best quality. I can get you the 43mm version, but it most definitely is not recommended for the HV20. Check out their site for the details.

Nacho

2007 October 2nd, 09:50

Some folks are willing to opt for the Raynox 7000 which dwarfs the HV20.

Anybody there owning the hd7000 that could report about quality and eventually post some samples at various zooms? I would be very thankful!

Help this thread become the BIG shootout that it was supposed to be! :hv20-smilie09:

romagjack

2007 October 3rd, 15:04

Raynox recommends getting the HD-6600 in the 52mm size, and then using the 43-52 step up adapter for the best quality. I can get you the 43mm version, but it most definitely is not recommended for the HV20. Check out their site for the details.

Thanks, I ordered the 52 mm Raynox. Looking forward to using it.

Sem Skywalker

2007 November 12th, 02:27

I got the Raynox 49mm for $36,11 on eBay. Hope it works fine :hv20-smilie03: Anyone got this one?

Craven

2007 November 14th, 15:06

Mal, is the shootout still in the works?

Noel

2007 November 17th, 17:38

Can you guys also include which Hoods work well with your lenses?

Atomicz

2007 November 19th, 15:31

Can you guys also include which Hoods work well with your lenses?

yeah for the raynex 6600 with the 72mm front, what lens hood are good with that? i read that the flower pedal ones gets in the view of shot. any ideas?

zephyrnoid

2007 November 22nd, 23:31

I bought a round metal one on e-bay for$12
yeah for the raynex 6600 with the 72mm front, what lens hood are good with that? i read that the flower pedal ones gets in the view of shot. any ideas?

TimeKoder13

2007 November 29th, 02:48

5 pages, 45 minutes, and no shootout??? Did the shooter get shot or as we say in the Hood, Get Got!?! ;-) Oh well, off to look at 24Peter's clips and other Merkury footages. Ciao...BTW, I'm temporarily in B-more or as the locals call it BodyMore if anyone needs to crew up down here.

TimeKoder13

2007 November 29th, 03:44

This is the Titanium Merkury (for lack of a better way to describe it). I have one of those on order and will report back. (It also has a 67mm front thread filter size.)

The "Black Beauty" Merkury has a 62mm front filter size and doesn't say titanium or high definition anywhere on it. At full wide thru about 50% of the zoom it is indistinguishable from the Canon WD-H43. Above that the corners/edges start to degrade. Little or no CA though. And if you remove the macro lens, the wide angle part turns into a wicked cool semi fisheye. However, it has been very challenging trying to find an adapter ring to attach the wide angle sans macro to the camera. Will explain more later. However, the wide angle alone is only about 25% zoom through.

Is this the same one at AlphaE TEN OUNCE? Thx

zephyrnoid

2007 November 30th, 00:02

I'm almost done with the minor shoot-out between HV20 (solo) , +6600 and + 7000. I'm laying out the HTML page for the presentation of the results and of course I'll have to write the damn thing up properly for you all. The only test I have yet to shoot is the Hotel Lobby interior. I'll try to do that this weekend and so look for a finished and complete job by the begining of next week. Why on earth it's been so darn hard to get the Canon lens is beyond me. Anyway, I may test that out later in December.
Here's a teaser...
The HD6600 & HD7000 are a lot closer in terms of image quality than I expected. Another surprise is how erratically the quality is THROUGH the zoom range for BOTH these lenses. Go figure!

24Peter

2007 November 30th, 12:16

Is this the same one at AlphaE TEN OUNCE? Thx

I don't know - got link?

Just to clarify, after much searching and owning four different wide angle lenses (including Canon's WD-H43) for my HV20, I've currently settled on a "Merkury Optics Super Wide 0.45X AF High Definition Digital Lens with Macro" (that's all written on the front barrel of the lens). In fact, been using it for several months. It's got a 58mm rear thread and 67mm front filter thread. (It's actually more like .75X wide angle since you can't use the .45x portion without the attached macro. Also, while the macro has 58mm threads, the actual glass is only about 52mm - there's a large "collar" around the rear element.) It is silver in color. I got it off eBay for $20 and I've never been able to find another one - on eBay or elsewhere (tried many Nextage searches etc. - no one seems to carry these anymore.)

I'd say it has 85% of the performance of the Canon WD-H43 - that is excellent sharpness/clarity up to about 85% zoom, then some degradation along the right and left edges (top and bottom remain excellent). I use it all the time without issue. If I could find others like it, I'd post a link. Sorry.

zephyrnoid

2007 December 2nd, 08:50

Some one asked me how the test was going. It's going well, just waiting for the Canon Lens to arrive.:hv20-smilie03:

xray

2007 December 3rd, 12:54

The only test I have yet to shoot is the Hotel Lobby interior. I'll try to do that this weekend and so look for a finished and complete job by the begining of next week.

Hey! the beginning of that week is here, like you said: you can enter the Canon data later...Show me what you got!

xray

2007 December 3rd, 13:08

I'll say :-)

CJDaniels

2007 December 4th, 11:19

Have we determined yet which lens has the best quality hands down? Is it the Canon? I was hoping this shoot out would have been over months ago, i have two cameras and no wide angle. Thanks for those that have posted their results.

TimeKoder13

2007 December 4th, 12:06

[QUOTE=24Peter;32513]I don't know - got link?
I've currently settled on a "Merkury Optics Super Wide 0.45X AF High Definition Digital Lens with Macro" (that's all written on the front barrel of the lens).

I just got one from your guy OviedoDigital but it doesn't say HI Def on the item image even tho it says so in the description for $29 including shipping.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEBTOX:IT&item=250191743727&_trksid=p3984.cTODAY.m238.lVI#ebayphotohosting

24Peter

2007 December 4th, 12:34

I just got one from your guy OviedoDigital but it doesn't say HI Def on the item image even tho it says so in the description for $29 including shipping.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEBTOX:IT&item=250191743727&_trksid=p3984.cTODAY.m238.lVI#ebayphotohosting

No, that's not it. It has a 62mm front filter thread. Mine is 67mm. (Though it might still work. Let us know.)

zephyrnoid

2007 December 4th, 22:43

I pick up the canon from UPS Tomorrow. In 24hrs from then, I'll have a definitive answer for you. Not my fault that Raynox deliberately tried to derail my evaluation.:hv20-smilie02:
Talk to you Thursday.

Have we determined yet which lens has the best quality hands down? Is it the Canon? I was hoping this shoot out would have been over months ago, i have two cameras and no wide angle. Thanks for those that have posted their results.

l_-_l

2007 December 5th, 03:00

Anybody there owning the Panasonic W4307H Wide-Angle lens adapter that could report about quality and eventually post some samples at various zooms? I would be very thankful!

AlphaWolf

2007 December 5th, 16:09

I'm new to the whole lens thing. What is the visual difference between a lens adapter that says HD and one that doesn't, all other things equal (.45x, Wide Angle, macro capable, etc.)?

Edit: Never mind. Turns out the lens I was looking at was the same as the one 24Peter mentioned. It just didn't advertise the AF and HD.

FWIW, they're selling it, Merkury Optics 58mm, on Amazon now.

zephyrnoid

2007 December 5th, 22:36

OK. I'm posting the preliminary report here and linking to it from other relevant posts. This is my FAST Summary. Since I only just got the Canon WD-H43 tonight, I have to do a round of exteriors with all 4 lenses before closing out the testing phase completely. Still, I know enough now to give you some summary conclusions. The details will follow in a dedicated Web page that will be linked from here.

The contenders:
1) Canon HV20 Built-in lens ( Control )
2) Canon WD-H43 .7X
3) Raynox HD6600Pro .66X
4) Raynox HD7000Pro .7X

Evaluation Parameters
- Corner Resolution
- Center Resolution
- Chromatic Aberration ( esp. color fringing)
- Barrel Distortion
- Resolution at Full Wide Interiors & Outside
- Resolution slightly zoomed in
- Resolution almost completely zoomed in

Conclusions:
A- The Raynox HD6600Pro scored the highest number of points overall.
It represented the best balance between minimized barrel distortion , minimized color fringing, and best resolution at full-wide interior and exterior shots with acceptable close-up resolution.
B- The Canon WD-H43 scored the second highest number of points, barely beating the Raynox HD6600Pro in overall resolution and excelling in close-focus resolution over all the lenses including the HV20 at full wide and focused close-up.
C- The Raynox HD7000Pro came in third place, being almost imperceptibly less than the HD6600Pro outdoors at full wide and significantly inferior to all the other lenses close-up and slightly zoomed in.
Considering the significantly larger front thread diameter and .7X vs .66 angle of view, the HD7000Pro was not deemed as good a value for the money as the HD6600Pro. The Canon WD-H43 had significantly greater barrel distortion but with slightly better resolution than the HD6600Pro.
I would consider it an effective .8X lens at best.
NOTE: The Canon WD-H43 & Raynox HD6600Pro, both enhanced resolution that the HV20 lens alone could not hold at full wide & Close-up focus.

Tomorrow I hope to shoot an outdoor trial to eliminate any question of thier relative performance in near-infinity focus settings. That will be it and I will then wrap the report up over the weekend. Whew!

winGstar

2007 December 6th, 12:10

I have been used WD-H43 for about 1 month.
In my experience, it has a little ghost(flare) issue in outdoor shooting.

My conceren is that WD-H43 always makse a diamond-like shape flare spot on the upper-middle position on the screen during the outdoor shooting with sunny day regardless solar incident angle.
During the shooting, it can be easily found slightly under the AF mark on the HV20 monitor screen.

I have a little request to zephyrnoid.
If you have enough time to test in the outdoor, could you add an evaluation parameter for flare/ghost problem with respect to the all WA lens contenders

24Peter

2007 December 6th, 13:40

Edit: Never mind. Turns out the lens I was looking at was the same as the one 24Peter mentioned. It just didn't advertise the AF and HD.

FWIW, they're selling it, Merkury Optics 58mm, on Amazon now.

Got link? I don't see the one I have on Amazon. Make sure whatever you're buying has 58mm rear threads and 67mm front threads.

AlphaWolf

2007 December 6th, 14:19

Got link? I don't see the one I have on Amazon. Make sure whatever you're buying has 58mm rear threads and 67mm front threads.

Here's the link (http://www.amazon.com/Merkury-58MM-BLAK-SMALL-CL-58WB/dp/B000IJS97E/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1196968492&sr=8-1)

Merkury WA 58MM BLAK 0.45 SMALL (CL-58WB) 58m CH

Technical Details

* 0.45x Magnification Broadens Your Field Of View
* Milti-Coated Optical Glass
* 58mm Mount
* Black Finish
* Macro Capabilities

The page doesn't list all the details, but the box says HD, AF, Macro, and 62mm front. It costs $32 new.

zephyrnoid

2007 December 7th, 09:58

Not possible to do the outdoors flare test. I just finished the WD-H43 outdoors shoot( to match the others) and I'm burned out! Now to write it all up. I shall however shoot an indoor scenario with deliberate introduction of a spectral light source to gauge relative flare between all four lens arrangements-hopefully that'll be enough- that's how much I care !:hv20-smilie77:

I have been used WD-H43 for about 1 month.
In my experience, it has a little ghost(flare) issue in outdoor shooting.

My conceren is that WD-H43 always makse a diamond-like shape flare spot on the upper-middle position on the screen during the outdoor shooting with sunny day regardless solar incident angle.
During the shooting, it can be easily found slightly under the AF mark on the HV20 monitor screen.

I have a little request to zephyrnoid.
If you have enough time to test in the outdoor, could you add an evaluation parameter for flare/ghost problem with respect to the all WA lens contenders

Charles Gerungan

2007 December 7th, 15:03

seider

2007 December 7th, 22:25

Did you guys see the comparison pictures (http://raynox.co.jp/comparison/video/comp_hv20.htm#ra5243vs6600_43) on the Raynox site? They recommend using the 52 mm version with an adapter over the 43 mm version when using an HV20. Quite the difference.

the 43 is burry on the sides, while the 52 is nice and sharp the whole way though. iv just made up my mind about which size im getting!
Thx

ccirelli

2007 December 10th, 12:48

Hey gang,

Any opinions on this lens?:

http://cgi.ebay.com/43mm-0-45X-Wide-Angle-Lens-For-CANON-HV20-HD-Camcorders_W0QQitemZ150191104626QQihZ005QQcategory Z64325QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem#ebayph otohosting

I read through this thread so I am trying to narrow down to some specific choices. I can't drop $200 on the Canon lens, so I'm looking to find the best lens in the $40 - $60 range.

Thanks for any opinions you can provide!

craig

Judy

2007 December 10th, 17:52

Hi Everyone,

OK, so now I'm pretty confused. If I understood Zephyrnoid's post on December 5th, the Canon WD-H43 .7X did quite well in his testing.

I want to keep the camera light, and there're two Canon WA adapters which have very similar model numbers. There's the WD-H43 and the WD-43. I "think", but am not sure that it's the WD-43 which is the lighter of the two, is that correct? That is NOT the WA adapter which was tested, is that also correct?

Let's assume for discussion, that function and not cost is the most important variable here. If that were so, which WA lense performs the best, assuming you want good sharpness, decent low light performance and the ability to get reasonably close to the subject? I'm not saying that money is unlimited here, but given that I tend to keep these things a long time, I can splurge a little on an auxillary lense.

Thanks.

Judy

zephyrnoid

2007 December 11th, 20:42

Gosh! I think my review pretty much placed the stamp of approval on the Raynox HD6600 which I have for sale in the MarketPlace.It it were otherwise, I would have said so. I have 20hrs into that review already. The 6600 is the lightest, followed by the 7000 and the heaviest is the WD-H43. But it's silly to call it heavy- it aint

... If that were so, which WA lense performs the best, assuming you want good sharpness, decent low light performance and the ability to get reasonably close to the subject? I'm not saying that money is unlimited here, but given that I tend to keep these things a long time, I can splurge a little on an auxillary lense.

Thanks.

Judy

Judy

2007 December 12th, 23:56

I wanted to make extra sure before any purchases. Am I correct that I should also get a UV filter (72 mm) to protect the lense if I decide to purchase it?

ccirelli

2007 December 13th, 07:45

The "Black Beauty" Merkury has a 62mm front filter size and doesn't say titanium or high definition anywhere on it. At full wide thru about 50% of the zoom it is indistinguishable from the Canon WD-H43. Above that the corners/edges start to degrade. Little or no CA though. And if you remove the macro lens, the wide angle part turns into a wicked cool semi fisheye. However, it has been very challenging trying to find an adapter ring to attach the wide angle sans macro to the camera. Will explain more later. However, the wide angle alone is only about 25% zoom through.

Just ordered this from eBay - got it for $19, plus another $3 or so for the 43 to 52 step-up. If I don't like it, the seller offers a 7-day (from date of delivery) return policy.

Can't go wrong for $19! Here is the link the one I ordered in case anyone is interested. Hopefully this lens will do the trick.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260192517776&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.ebay.com%3A80%2Fsearch%2Fse arch.dll%3Fsofocus%3Dunknown%26sbrftog%3D1%26dfsp% 3D1%26from%3DR10%26_trksid%3Dm37%26satitle%3D26019 2517776%26sacat%3D-1%2526catref%253DC6%26sargn%3D-1%2526saslc%253D2%26sadis%3D200%26fpos%3D17859%26s abfmts%3D1%26saobfmts%3Dinsif%26ftrt%3D1%26ftrv%3D 1%26saprclo%3D%26saprchi%3D%26fsop%3D1%26fsoo%3D1% 26fvi%3D1

ccirelli

2007 December 13th, 07:47

I wanted to make extra sure before any purchases. Am I correct that I should also get a UV filter (72 mm) to protect the lense if I decide to purchase it?

Depends on what your lens costs, and how / what you are shooting. Personally, I wouldn't bother on a cheaper lens. If you get the Canon for $200, or one of the Raynox lenses? Maybe a good idea.

But keep in mind, if you get a cheap filter - you are putting cheap glass in front of your good glass. Defeats the purpose of buying a good lens in the first place.

So, if you are going to use a filter for protection - spend the money on a good one.

zephyrnoid

2007 December 13th, 08:06

The lens protection via a front-end placed filter is always contentious.Here's why:
- a piece of glass in FRONT of your lens adds to the optical path, especially with wide-angled lenses. This can result in unwanted image degradation , especially if there are stray rays entering the lens (sun in the corner of the scene for example).
- not adding such a filter of course, exposes the lens to the environment, always a risk in certain situations.
My favorite solution has been to always put a lens hood on it. The Hd6600Pro for example uses a 72mm hood that can easily be found if you hunt around E-bay or via online retailers. I prefer stiff hoods and use both a round metal WIDE ANGLE hood or a Cokin P Series if I need to add filters up front.
This gives you the option of NOT putting anything in front of the lens unless you decide that the risk warrants such a tactic.*The other day I was shooting the HV20+6600 without my hood ( a still capture actually) and couldn't understand why I had this bright spot in the lower right corner of the image. After 2 or three shots I realized that I forgot to stick the hood on and sure enough , even the 1.5cm depth of hood eliminated the flare instantly. :hv20-smilie70:

I wanted to make extra sure before any purchases. Am I correct that I should also get a UV filter (72 mm) to protect the lense if I decide to purchase it?

Judy

2007 December 13th, 12:42

Why do you prefer the stiff hood vs a rubber one?

Judy

24Peter

2007 December 13th, 12:44

Just ordered this from eBay - got it for $19, plus another $3 or so for the 43 to 52 step-up. If I don't like it, the seller offers a 7-day (from date of delivery) return policy.

Can't go wrong for $19! Here is the link the one I ordered in case anyone is interested. Hopefully this lens will do the trick.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260192517776&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.ebay.com%3A80%2Fsearch%2Fse arch.dll%3Fsofocus%3Dunknown%26sbrftog%3D1%26dfsp% 3D1%26from%3DR10%26_trksid%3Dm37%26satitle%3D26019 2517776%26sacat%3D-1%2526catref%253DC6%26sargn%3D-1%2526saslc%253D2%26sadis%3D200%26fpos%3D17859%26s abfmts%3D1%26saobfmts%3Dinsif%26ftrt%3D1%26ftrv%3D 1%26saprclo%3D%26saprchi%3D%26fsop%3D1%26fsoo%3D1% 26fvi%3D1

Just to be clear, I've stepped away from that lens and am using a 58mm Merkruy high defintion wide angle with a 67mm front thread. The 58/67 is about 85% zoom through with no issue, though I routinely go to 100% b/c I don't mind the rt/lft edges a tiny bit soft. With the 52mm version you can't go much beyond 50% without the edges (including top and bottom which you don't have at all on the 58/67) degrading.

Goose

2007 December 13th, 16:37

The lens protection via a front-end placed filter is always contentious.Here's why:
- a piece of glass in FRONT of your lens adds to the optical path, especially with wide-angled lenses. This can result in unwanted image degradation , especially if there are stray rays entering the lens (sun in the corner of the scene for example).
- not adding such a filter of course, exposes the lens to the environment, always a risk in certain situations.
My favorite solution has been to always put a lens hood on it. The Hd6600Pro for example uses a 72mm hood that can easily be found if you hunt around E-bay or via online retailers. I prefer stiff hoods and use both a round metal WIDE ANGLE hood or a Cokin P Series if I need to add filters up front.
This gives you the option of NOT putting anything in front of the lens unless you decide that the risk warrants such a tactic.*The other day I was shooting the HV20+6600 without my hood ( a still capture actually) and couldn't understand why I had this bright spot in the lower right corner of the image. After 2 or three shots I realized that I forgot to stick the hood on and sure enough , even the 1.5cm depth of hood eliminated the flare instantly. :hv20-smilie70:

Hi mate

I bought a cheap rubber hood from ebay for the front of my 6600 and it comes into view at full wide. Can you link to any specific hoods that dont?

cheers

zephyrnoid

2007 December 14th, 21:00

2 reasons
1- a stiff hood of aluminum is thinner and lighter.
2- a stiff hood will take the blows without compressing. I actually damaged a $1,000 camera lens once when I walked into a scaffold while peering through the lens. the hood just compressed and Wham! smashed my lens right into a junction joint. Worst day of my life since it happened in the first hour of a one-day shoot. I lost the lens + a day!
For the 50mm the FotoDiox is darn nice, I use it on the HV20 normally. I like that after it take a big shock it will likely 'break away' from the lens front. That's a good thing.
Another plus for metal hoods Vs rubber hoods. I often will flag a stubborn flare from the sun or a hairlight with black foil. that can be gaffers taped way more easily on metal than rubber.:hv20-smilie77:

Why do you prefer the stiff hood vs a rubber one?

Judy

Judy

2007 December 15th, 13:45

2 reasons
1- a stiff hood of aluminum is thinner and lighter.
2- a stiff hood will take the blows without compressing. I actually damaged a $1,000 camera lens once when I walked into a scaffold while peering through the lens. the hood just compressed and Wham! smashed my lens right into a junction joint. Worst day of my life since it happened in the first hour of a one-day shoot. I lost the lens + a day!
For the 50mm the FotoDiox is darn nice, I use it on the HV20 normally. I like that after it take a big shock it will likely 'break away' from the lens front. That's a good thing.
Another plus for metal hoods Vs rubber hoods. I often will flag a stubborn flare from the sun or a hairlight with black foil. that can be gaffers taped way more easily on metal than rubber.:hv20-smilie77:

Would this be the type you'd recommend? I want something that is relatively compact for travel.
http://cgi.ebay.com/72-mm-72mm-Aluminum-metal-wide-angle-lens-hood-black_W0QQitemZ120198309652QQihZ002QQcategoryZ7899 9QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Thanks,

Judy

zephyrnoid

2007 December 15th, 14:05

That's exactly the one I use on the HD6600Pro! ONLY you'de be paying 1/2 what I paid. What a deal.
Here's a hot tip for you and the other HV20 shooters.
Carefully run some vaseline jelly or lip balm into the threads of the hood. It makes it go on Muuuuch more smoothly and minimizes the binding that sometime happens when Alu threads are used!:hv20-smilie70:
In fact, let me tell you I run vaseline into all my gear-bag zippers with the same effect- NO BINDING!
Happy Holidays!:hv20-smilie31: There's another HV20'r in the area, why not search 'HV20LUG', we're trying to form a local HV20 user group- meeting at The DogfishHead Ale House in G'Burg, MD

Would this be the type you'd recommend? I want something that is relatively compact for travel.
http://cgi.ebay.com/72-mm-72mm-Aluminum-metal-wide-angle-lens-hood-black_W0QQitemZ120198309652QQihZ002QQcategoryZ7899 9QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Thanks,

Judy

3cmosHV50

2007 December 15th, 23:36

I guess I got lucky, but for me the Digital Concepts Model No. 2146w manufactured by Sakar in japan, Black with Titanium Logo,works amazingly well. I've tried other lenses, but this one is really the best of all worlds, very little edge blurring or distortion, picked it up on ebay for around 40. It requires a 43 to 46 mm adapter, as it is designed to mount to a 46 mm camera. The addition of the adapter doesnt hurt with vignetting, but it doesnt help either, still a nice cheap alternative , most bang for the buck candidate, I think this particular model deserves more testing, will post some footage as soon as i get a computer that can handle HD..

dmoreno

2007 December 16th, 00:54

Zephyrnoid, thanks for all this valuable info. After checking your reviews I am seriously considering buying the Raynox 6600. Are you using Raynox HD6600PRO 43? o a larger size using a stepup ring?

Goose

2007 December 16th, 03:38

That's exactly the one I use on the HD6600Pro! ONLY you'de be paying 1/2 what I paid. What a deal.
Here's a hot tip for you and the other HV20 shooters.
Carefully run some vaseline jelly or lip balm into the threads of the hood. It makes it go on Muuuuch more smoothly and minimizes the binding that sometime happens when Alu threads are used!:hv20-smilie70:
In fact, let me tell you I run vaseline into all my gear-bag zippers with the same effect- NO BINDING!
Happy Holidays!:hv20-smilie31: There's another HV20'r in the area, why not search 'HV20LUG', we're trying to form a local HV20 user group- meeting at The DogfishHead Ale House in G'Burg, MD

Cool - do you know if this hood will come into view at full wide?

Cheers

accelv

2007 December 17th, 21:06

I just got lucky and found a Minolta branded Kenko lens, the LD-055w, .55x lens on Ebay for $15. I took a chance and it panned out. The lens is sharp from edge to edge at the wide angle with some barrel distortion, and gets a bit fuzzy when zoomed in all the way, so I guess it's not zoom-through.

It had a 52mm opening so I got a 43mm-52mm step-up ring and the auto-focus still works. I've owned Kenko lenses before with good results. It's also colored silver so it looks like it was made for the camcorder.:hv20-smilie77:

On the downside, I had previously gotten a wide angle lens on Ebay from GoShot Camera, a Phoenix brand supposedly made in Japan, which was supposed to fit and work on an HV20. I had to send it back because it didn't fit, then they sent me an adapter ring which fit but the lens was so blurry around the edges that it was unusable. Since I had thrown away the box and warrantee paper, they would not take it back for a refund. Needless to say, I will not do business with them again.:hv20-smilie49:

Atomicz

2007 December 20th, 21:43

i have a question, i got the merkury lens for shooting paintball so the original lens on the camrea does not get damaged, now since the merkury lens is not hd will it change video quality?

zephyrnoid

2007 December 20th, 22:37

dmoreno- I use the HD6600Pro 52 mm with 43>52 step up ring
Goose - That shallow metal hood does not vignette at full wide on the HD6600Pro !!! Nice hood for next to nothing and search around you'll find my DIY for a funky by functional hood cap- posted somewhere here in HV20.com

Goose

2007 December 21st, 05:38

Thanks zeph

milespapineau

2007 December 21st, 07:35

dont start threads u wont finish

Dust'n the Callipygous

2007 December 27th, 15:21

which 6600 was used in the test? the 43 or 52mm?

kptgreg

2007 December 28th, 06:45

Just read this entire thread and 24Peter you were saying you use the Merkury .45x wide angle with 58mm rear thread and 67mm front thread. Alpha Wolf provided a link to a Amazon page.

Was this the correct Wide Angle lens??

I went to Merkury Innovations and they provide almost no specifications on CL-58WB.

I believe this was the link. (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000IJS97E/sr=1-1/qid=1198839068/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1198839068&sr=1-1&seller=)

Any help would be appreciated, I am new to this.

AlphaWolf

2007 December 28th, 10:13

There's one difference I noticed. It has a 62" front end, not a 67". However, I found filters for 62", and the lens works fine, both for WA shots and macro shots.

kptgreg

2007 December 28th, 15:40

There's one difference I noticed. It has a 62" front end, not a 67". However, I found filters for 62", and the lens works fine, both for WA shots and macro shots.

Thank you for your reply, this has been a big help. I am getting a HV20 today and want a Wide Angle for my trip on Jan 10th. I think I will try this one from Amazon.

I am new to this but I see that I need a Adapter Ring, is it 43mm to 58mm like this one link (http://www.amazon.com/Adorama-Step-Up-Adapter-Ring-Filter/dp/B0002HMRKC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1198842414&sr=1-1)

Also, do you recommend a hood and if so which one?

AlphaWolf

2007 December 28th, 16:01

You'll definitely need the 43-58 adapter. The link you show looks okay.

I haven't looked at hoods yet, but I know other people have.

voltorben

2007 December 28th, 17:06

ianrutter@mac.com

2007 December 28th, 19:25

24Peter

2007 December 28th, 22:23

AlphaWolf

2007 December 29th, 01:11

Yeah. I take off the lens if I need to zoom that much.

kptgreg

2007 December 29th, 09:48

I had the black Merkury 58/62mm. It was a little wider than the silver 58/67mm, but the IQ broke down above 50% zoom. If you can live with not zooming more than 1/2 way while you're using it, it's fine.

Sorry if I am posting this twice, I am not sure if it worked the first time:

24 Peter or anyone else. I am getting confused on which Merkury wide angles is the best:

I saw this one that is on Ebay with a 58mm/62mm but says it is for Canon Rebel but is a Merkury Titanium

Here is the link (http://cgi.ebay.com/58mm-.45-Wide-Angle-Lens-for-Canon-5D-20D-30D-Rebel-XTi_W0QQitemZ360008335462QQcmdZViewItem?IMSfp=TL07 12250833a18320)

They seem to have a lot here also at another Ebay link (http://cgi.ebay.ca/58MM-Wide-Angle-Lens-0-45x-for-Canon-Digital-Rebel-XT_W0QQitemZ260196575814QQihZ016QQcategoryZ106845Q QtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem)

But can you please tell me which of these you think is the best, including the one from the original Amazon link (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000IJS97E/sr=1-1/qid=1198839068/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1198839068&sr=1-1&seller=)?

tyley

2008 January 11th, 14:26

I scored a Olympus Camedia Wide Extention Lens Pro (WCON-08B) designed for a fixed lens digital camera that has since stopped being produced. It has a 62mm back thread (and using two step up rings mounted easily and works fine. It cost nearly nothing from a local camera shop as this is an accessory for a defunct camera. I cannot see any loss of quality over the prime lens alone.

hi all,

from my research, many seem to agree that a 58mm wide angle lens will perform better in terms of distortion than a 52mm. additionally, raynox for example, claims that their optics are superior because the final filter thread is 72mm (on the 6600?) which is, i guess, better than a final thread of 62mm or 67mm.

can i infer that purchasing a 62mm wide angle lens using a 43mm to 62mm step up is even better or at some point are there diminishing returns (perhaps even some light would be lost...i don't know).

would a 62mm wide angle lens with a 43mm to 62mm step up work?

thanks,

ty

Dust'n the Callipygous

2008 January 21st, 00:33

is there a difference between the raynox hd6600pro and the dcr-6600pro? i need a lense really soon and bhphoto is all out of the hd. i also couldn't find any raynox on the alpha electronics site.

aero

2008 January 21st, 01:20

is there a difference between the raynox hd6600pro and the dcr-6600pro? i need a lense really soon and bhphoto is all out of the hd. i also couldn't find any raynox on the alpha electronics site.

From Raynox's page for conversion lenses for the HV20 (http://raynox.co.jp/english/video/hv20/index.htm): "Both HD-6600PRO-52 and DCR-6600PRO are the same lens." (Scroll to the middle of the page, the section on the HD-6600PRO-52.) Way I understand it is if you're getting the HD-6600PRO you have to specify 52mm (assuming that's what you want). The DCR-6600PRO, however, seems to come only in 52mm (as a search of BH (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?shs=dcr-6600PRO&ci=0&sb=ps&pn=1&sq=desc&InitialSearch=yes&O=RootPage.jsp&A=search&Q=*&bhs=t) will confirm). Oh, they seem to have the DCR in stock. Good luck! :hv20-smilie77:

zephyrnoid

2008 January 21st, 20:44

PEOPLE! you are not paying close attention to my posts!
- The Raynox 6600 is BETTER than the 7000 . Ignore the mounting threads business!
- ALL 6600's are the SAME lens with different rear mounts. Therefore they are the SAME performance! I had a heated discussion with Raynox about their branding and they admitted that all the confusion about lens designations is just 'marketing' hype. Look the lenses were originally ported for still digicam use and the HD-6600PRO-52 and DCR-6600PRO are the SAME EXACT lens with diffferent designations to indicate the market they are sold in. Why? who knows? Different UPC's maybe? All that matters is that you understand that a lens produces an image circle. This circle is cropped to form a rectangle by the camera's imaging path. The larger the image circle, the larger the center 'sweet spot' . If you have 4 versions of the SAME lens but with different rear threads, the sweet spot will be the SAME on all of them. Sheesh! Sorry to be so testy but Raynox have not helped clear any of this up.

ccirelli

2008 January 21st, 20:58

Just to be clear, I've stepped away from that lens and am using a 58mm Merkruy high defintion wide angle with a 67mm front thread. The 58/67 is about 85% zoom through with no issue, though I routinely go to 100% b/c I don't mind the rt/lft edges a tiny bit soft. With the 52mm version you can't go much beyond 50% without the edges (including top and bottom which you don't have at all on the 58/67) degrading.

Just curious, are many people here concerned about zooming through a WA lens? Personally, I don't ever see a need to zoom with the wide lens on (but that's just me). I'd prefer to pop the lens off.

Thx,
craig

Rico_YVR

2008 January 21st, 22:33

is there a difference between the raynox hd6600pro and the dcr-6600pro? i need a lense really soon and bhphoto is all out of the hd. i also couldn't find any raynox on the alpha electronics site.

Dear Dust'n the Callipygous,

zephyrnoid is CORRECT (you should all read his posts ok!?) :hv20-smilie84:. The HD-6600 PRO 52mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/394720-REG/Raynox_HD6600PRO52_HD_6600PRO52_52mm_0_66x_Wide.ht ml) and DCR-6600 PRO (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/247051-REG/Raynox_DCR6600PRO_DCR_6600Pro_0_66x_Wide_Angle.htm l) are the **SAME LENS**. I wrote to Raynox customer support and they confirmed this. Also, aero kindly provided the link above to the Raynox website where they confirm both lenses are the same.

I just placed my order for the DCR-6600 PRO today with B&H as the HD-6600 PRO 52mm is out of stock. If you want one... get one now as they seem to be selling out everywhere!

Also... for those that are savvy at reading product specifications.. if you go to the B&H website and compare the specs for the two lenses above, you will see that the Outside Diameter (this is the actual diameter of the lens housing - NOT the filter threads) of the HD-6600 PRO 52mm is listed as being 75mm. This is INCORRECT. I had B&H staff confirm (they told me they pulled both lenses out of stock to check this) **both lenses** have an Outside Diameter of 77mm (which is the same as the DCR-6600 PRO product specs).

Message from B&H support:

Subject: Raynox HD6600-Pro and DCR-6600

Our Answer: Thank you for your patience-since we have misinformation on our site we did a test in our store and found the Cavision does fit to both lenses.Both lenses do have filter threads of 72mm and outside obviously 77mm.

The reason I was asking about the OD of the lens housing was for 2 reasons:

1) I wanted to make sure they were the SAME LENS which is what Raynox was claiming. If this were true, there should be no dimensional variations between the two models (I think anyway).

2) I wanted to see if the CAVISION LH77 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/434539-REG/Cavision_LH77_Cavision_LH77_Lens_Hood.html) Lens Hood would fit either lens. This lens hood requires the lens to have a 77mm OD in order to attach securely. For any of those interested, this hood is supposed to be physically compatible with the HD-6600PRO 52mm and the DCR-6600 PRO. *** However I don't know whether you will get any vignetting with this hood. If anyone has the hood and the Raynox lens, please let us know.

Ironically enough, I live in Vancouver, BC and CAVISION is located here. One day I may pass by (with my HV20 and Raynox lens) to see if it fits and if there are any signs of vignetting using the hood.

Cheers!

Jazz

2008 January 24th, 19:36

Bump to keep this thread near the top. Based on what I read, I just bought the Raynox HD-6600Pro-52 from B&H for $139 and it included the 43 to 52 step-up ring. I plan to keep this lens on my HV20 all the time.

Thanks for the review,
James

zephyrnoid

2008 January 25th, 15:51

For all with the 6600. you can get excellent no frills metal hoods for them on ebay for around $6- $12.
However, I have a Cokin P350 Hood on it's way to me so look out for a review of that soon. Also, I'm, working to get all the HTML of the Wide Lens comparison I did in November finished and posted. Look for a heads up here.

zephyrnoid

2008 January 25th, 21:28

http://www.imagometrics.com/FLReviews/HV20_Wide.htm
OK. The mega-comparison is finally up . I realize that a lot of you will gripe that the WD-H43 is absent from the first run of tests. That was because I did not get it in hand until a week later and no one wanted to loan it to me- not Canon or any retailer (just as well). I was too disappointed with it's noticeable barrel distortion to bother doing yet another round of exteriors once it arrived, so I just ran it along with the others on the chart and the one interior shot. Given the many advantages of the Raynox Lenses, the WD-H43 finished in third place. If you have to have a Silver colored lens, that about it's ONLY advantage over the Raynox optics. I was so impressed with how well the 6600 performed given that it's a .66 and not a .7, I had to give it the nod. Someone else may get different test results than I and I can respect that. Special thanks to Raynox for providing the test 7000 lens.

Note: My chart is available for purchase if anyone wants to try their hand at these tests.

bansheeproductions

2008 January 25th, 21:46

I thought you were testing the Merkury also....

geist

2008 January 26th, 03:29

zephyrnoid thanks for the review. I recently received my Canon WD-H43 and was a bit disappointed about the barrel distortion at full wide and your comparisons show that.

I'm thinking of selling my Canon and importing the Raynox HD-6600PRO 52mm. Importing because the Raynox is stupidly expensive in oz - $40 more than the WD-H43 ($310+).

zephyrnoid

2008 January 26th, 12:36

Never got one from anyone. I can only do so much on my own dime.:hv20-smilie70:

I thought you were testing the Merkury also....
geist- Are you in Germany perchance? The 6600 is worth whatever extra you pay over the WD-H43 because:
1) Front thread
2) Wider angle of view
3) Less Distortion

nolonemo

2008 January 26th, 14:34

Zephyrnoid - :hv20-smilie77:

TheNut

2008 January 26th, 20:24

I just completed my video review today of the WD-H43.

You can check it out here: http://www.vimeo.com/638936

zephyrnoid

2008 January 26th, 22:32

Nice work! So what were YOUR conclusions?
I just completed my video review today of the WD-H43.

You can check it out here: http://www.vimeo.com/638936

TheNut

2008 January 27th, 08:22

It's a good lens, but not a great one. It has excellent sharpness, but it also suffers from high levels of barrel distortion and flare. Now flare can be controlled with a lens hood and proper filming, so that's not to big of a deal. Barrel distortions on the other hand are far more difficult to avoid, especially indoors.

I've also seen your extensive review (great by the way!), so I would recommend the Raynox 6600 Pro as an alternative. Both are good lenses, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. It still stands that the ideal solution would be to use a 35mm adapter with any of the higher quality glass out there, but then we're looking at $$$ ;)

zephyrnoid

2008 January 27th, 12:50

Let's keep in mind that all the 35mm adapters out there 'Throw Away' about 20% of the lens's resolution at the groundglass. All the 35mm adapter allows you to do is pull-focus the lens for selective depth of field shifts. You can still do that on any HV20 with a DIY gizmo that works just fine at about $10 in materials expense. I'm lost trying to understand what all the fuss is about 35mm adapters that diminish the image resolution down by 20%:hv20-smilie15:

It's a good lens, but not a great one. It has excellent sharpness, but it also suffers from high levels of barrel distortion and flare. Now flare can be controlled with a lens hood and proper filming, so that's not to big of a deal. Barrel distortions on the other hand are far more difficult to avoid, especially indoors.

I've also seen your extensive review (great by the way!), so I would recommend the Raynox 6600 Pro as an alternative. Both are good lenses, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. It still stands that the ideal solution would be to use a 35mm adapter with any of the higher quality glass out there, but then we're looking at $$$ ;)

novulet

2008 January 27th, 13:55

The point is achieving the shallow DOF for a film-look, not just only being able to control the focus.

Let's keep in mind that all the 35mm adapters out there 'Throw Away' about 20% of the lens's resolution at the groundglass. All the 35mm adapter allows you to do is pull-focus the lens for selective depth of field shifts. You can still do that on any HV20 with a DIY gizmo that works just fine at about $10 in materials expense. I'm lost trying to understand what all the fuss is about 35mm adapters that diminish the image resolution down by 20%:hv20-smilie15:

nykee23

2008 January 27th, 15:40

Thanks for such a comprehensive test of the wide angle lenses. I just ordered the Raynox 66000 from B&H with the adapter ring. Nice that there's no barrel distortion from your tests. These forums are awesome!!

zephyrnoid

2008 January 27th, 18:44

The way to do that is to lock the HV20 at whatever aperture you want- yes, it's limited to f1.8 but that's not far off of what the largest aperture the still-cam lenses are delivering- ie- f1.2. f1.4 or f1.8. Using ND filters to control exposure and fixing shutter at 1/48th.
Plan D (Fixed Shutter & Gain Variable Aperture)
ACTION: EXP lock function
1) Zoom to Full Wide- With Fixed Illumination Cap
2) Cine Mode
3) HDV 24P
RESULT> Fixed Shutter Speed & Varied aperture range

EXP Shutter Iris Gain
+6 1/48 1.8 0dB
+5 1/48 2.0 0dB
+4 1/48 2.2 0dB
+3 1/48 2.4 0dB
+2 1/48 2.6 0dB
+1 1/48 2.8 0dB
0 1/48 2.8 0dB = Default Based On Target Illuminator
-1 1/48 3.4 0dB
-2 1/48 3.4 0dB
-3 1/48 4.0 0dB
-4 1/48 4.0 0dB
-5 1/48 4.8 0dB
-6 1/48 4.8 0dB
-7 1/48 5.6 0dB
-8 1/48 5.6 0dB
-9 1/48 5.6 0dB
-10 1/48 5.6 0dB
-11 1/48 5.6 0dB

The point is achieving the shallow DOF for a film-look, not just only being able to control the focus.

geist

2008 January 27th, 20:50

geist- Are you in Germany perchance? The 6600 is worth whatever extra you pay over the WD-H43 because:
1) Front thread
2) Wider angle of view
3) Less Distortion

Not German, I'm only learning the language. I'll import the 6600 from B&H with step-up kit. Even after shipping costs it'll only be about AU$200.

nathan118

2008 February 4th, 22:13

TehNrd

2008 February 5th, 01:42

I got my new Raynox 6600 today and did a little test before I put it on for good. The cheaper price, marginally better reviews, smaller size, and front threads made me go for the raynox. Specifically it's the Raynox HD-6600Pro 52mm. Bought it with the step up ring from BH for $139 with the step up ring included. They're selling the lens with NO step up ring for the same price. Odd.

For my test I looked at two different areas of my house where the wide angle would give me options that I couldn't even have with the built-in lens. Take a look!

http://www.vimeo.com/664806

This along with this, http://www.imagometrics.com/FLReviews/HV20_Wide.htm , has convinced me to get this....

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=529160&is=REG

troppus

2008 February 5th, 14:23

This along with this, http://www.imagometrics.com/FLReviews/HV20_Wide.htm , has convinced me to get this....

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=529160&is=REG

Love the review with the comparison pics.. Glad i only spent ~$130 to get my 6600 and didnt go for the WD-H43..

i actually received my HD6600 last night.. LOVE IT!!

Isolated

2008 February 5th, 15:02

Seems like the Raynox lenses are coming up on top, if you're willing to spend the extra $$ of course.

Has anyone ever used the Raynox .5x lens? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/273889-REG/Raynox_DCR5000_DCR_5000_0_5x_Wide_Angle.html

I'm going for the widest angle possible without too much barrel distortion. According to the shot they have on the raynox website : http://raynox.co.jp/comparison/video/comp_hv20.htm#dcr-5000
there doesn't seem too be much (if any) distortion.

Anybody have any thoughts on this lens?

_gl

2008 February 6th, 08:43

Hey zephyrnoid, great roundup. :hv20-smilie70:

I'm going for the widest angle possible without too much barrel distortion. According to the shot they have on the raynox website : http://raynox.co.jp/comparison/video/comp_hv20.htm#dcr-5000
there doesn't seem too be much (if any) distortion.

True, but I hope you checked out the large images, it's has really bad chromatic aberration (colour blurring) near the edges. You don't see it on the thumbnails.

Looking at the HV20 side-by-sides on the Raynox site of their various lenses (including even the highly-rated 6000s), what really strikes me is just how good the HV20 optics are. I think I'll take my wide-angle off whenever possible.

Isolated

2008 February 7th, 04:18

I see the color blurring is pretty prevalent on the 5000. There doesn't seem to be as much in the 6600 and 7000.

Hopefully the blurring won't stand out too much. The action in the center of the frame should keep the audience's attention enough so they never even notice.

Of course I would love to have a wide angle that stays sharp and has little barrel distortion and has the quality glass of century optics. But I'll take what I can get. For the wide angles available with the HV20, I'm thinking the Raynox 5000 is the best that I'm going to get. :hv20-smilie70:

_gl

2008 February 7th, 07:16

Hopefully the blurring won't stand out too much. The action in the center of the frame should keep the audience's attention enough so they never even notice.

Sure, it all depends on what you're shooting. I don't like it because I want a more filmic look, and it looks like bad video.

julious29

2008 February 7th, 21:07

nathan118

2008 February 7th, 23:13

I recently ordered the Merkury CL-52WB 52mm High Definition 0.45X Wide Angle Lens (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000HJ8P2O) and I am wondering if that in itself would be able to connect to the HV20 or do I need an adapter ring? If so, what adapter do I need? If you have a link, I would appreciate it. Thank you much :)

The hv20 has 43mm threads, so you need a 43-52mm step-up ring. Here are two:

General Brand (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/150107-REG/General_Brand_43_52_43mm_52mm_Step_Up_Ring_Lens.ht ml)

Cokin Brand (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/387498-REG/Cokin_CR4352_43_52mm_Step_Up_Ring_Lens.html)

My step-up ring came with my Raynox 52mm wide angle, but the brand of that is a BOWER. It works well. That might be the "general brand" on b&h, don't know for sure though.

zephyrnoid

2008 February 7th, 23:18

Finally received the Grossly Overpriced Cokin P350 hood/filter holder for the Raynox 6600. I used the Cokin P 72mm ring for the mounting and It works but there is a hair of vignetting on the top left corner of the image. Looks like I may have to hack the front 2 slots on the filter holder to move the lens a hair closer to the front. Otherwise I love that it's lightweight, uses Cokin filters, collapses and gives the wide-angle some breathing room. Damn Cokin for selling a $10 product for over $100. Really!

zephyrnoid

2008 February 8th, 20:24

Update. I used my Dremmel cut-off wheel to nip the front two slots of the filter holder away and viola! positioning the holder more forward into the hood indeed eliminates the Vignetting I was getting and in fact closes up the excess space caused by the holder having 3.5 slots. Apparently Cokin makes a 'Slim' holder that does what I just did for $11.00 Go Cokin! The hood now works like a dream on the Raynox HD6600Pro so pics are in order Monday or Tuesday of next week.

trpltongue

2008 February 13th, 09:45

zephyrnoid,

Thanks for taking the time to do such a relevant review. One thing that strikes me about the Raynox lenses is that the image appears somewhat darker than with the WD-H43.

Comparing this shot with the Canon WD-H43:

http://www.imagometrics.com/images/HV20Wides/12_05_07sml/IMG_0394.jpg

To this shot with the Raynox 6600:

http://www.imagometrics.com/images/HV20Wides/12_05_07sml/IMG_0392.jpg

There appears to be a visible difference in brightness even under controlled lighting. I shoot indoors most of the time, filming the kids and low light is a major concern for me. I wonder what the light passthrough is on the Raynox compared to the Canon? Is this something you noticed in your testing or is it only apparent when comparing images?

Thanks,

Russell

_gl

2008 February 13th, 11:07

zephyrnoid,
There appears to be a visible difference in brightness even under controlled lighting.

I can see the difference, but it seems minor to me.

trpltongue

2008 February 13th, 11:44

Yeah,

It's a bit difficult to see on this page, but when viewed on zephyrnoid's web page you can more clearly see the effect.

_gl

2008 February 13th, 11:52

It's a bit difficult to see on this page, but when viewed on zephyrnoid's web page you can more clearly see the effect.

It looks the same to me on his page, it's there but I'm not sure it's worth worrying about (note I'm viewing on a calibrated monitor).

zephyrnoid

2008 February 13th, 13:16

Unfortunately, color and density (brightness) are very very difficult to judge on screen due to the HUGE variance between everyone's monitors.
In the case of the two frames you show from our review- On my Apple Powerbook G4 , calibrated the way it happens to be, the variance is about 1/4 f stop to my highly trained eye. That would be reasonable margin for two lenses of slightly different focal length even at the same camera settings. So yes, I would say it might be there but very insignificant. You don't really notice practical difference until you hit 1/3 stop.

trpltongue

2008 February 13th, 13:46

_gl and zephyrnoid,

Good to hear. It must just be my monitor because I see a distinct difference in the 2 images in both brightness and color, but I'm NOT viewing on a calibrated monitor so I'll defer to the folks who are in the know :) Especially zephyrnoid who actually did the tests :)

Thanks for clearing it up for me, so to speak....

zephyrnoid

2008 February 13th, 17:02

Well. On my monitor, these two look almost identical in density. If you have PS you could sample the Histograms for a more accurate read.
http://www.imagometrics.com/images/HV20Wides/12_05_07sml/IMG_0399.jpg
http://www.imagometrics.com/images/HV20Wides/12_05_07sml/IMG_0401.jpg

TimeKoder13

2008 February 15th, 12:03

All that matters is that you understand that a lens produces an image circle. This circle is cropped to form a rectangle by the camera's imaging path. The larger the image circle, the larger the center 'sweet spot' ..

EUREKA like a muhfuh, thx!!!

An addendum, I just found this sakar .5X 72mm HD WA while searching for the biggest thing I could find. Anyone have any thoughts on it? TIA

http://sakar.com/p-1449.aspx?categoryid=142

zephyrnoid

2008 February 16th, 12:52

Before you congratulate me too vehemently, allow me to clarify. The image circle is formed by the REAR element of any lens. The wider the lens' angle of view the SMALLER the image circle. So your .5X will have a smaller sweet spot than the .7X Sorry about that!.

EUREKA like a muhfuh, thx!!!

An addendum, I just found this sakar .5X 72mm HD WA while searching for the biggest thing I could find. Anyone have any thoughts on it? TIA

http://sakar.com/p-1449.aspx?categoryid=142

TimeKoder13

2008 February 16th, 16:59

No prob Zeph, I accidently bought the 58mm back to 62mm front Merkury instead of the 67 that 24Peter recommended a few months back. So it's the back size that matters for true sweet spot size, OK. No prob I'll just order the 67, but I forget the unintuitive math of photography, light and sound is .45X bigger or smaller than .7X? Thank you.

zephyrnoid

2008 February 16th, 18:59

Oh Gosh! I still haven't made it clear. Ok. One last try.
The more wide-angle a lens (front and rear thread sizes have nothing to do with this formula) the smaller the image circle that is formed at the sensor plane and therefore the smaller a part of the image center will be sharp. Telephoto lenses produce larger image circles at the sensor and the sweet spot is therefore larger. indeed, long apochromate lenses produce the best center to corner sharpness. So ...
a .5X lens is going to produce more vignetting, distortion and softening at the edges than the .7X or .6X . The Camera's native lens being the benchmark. I hope that helps

No prob Zeph, I accidently bought the 58mm back to 62mm front Merkury instead of the 67 that 24Peter recommended a few months back. So it's the back size that matters for true sweet spot size, OK. No prob I'll just order the 67, but I forget the unintuitive math of photography, light and sound is .45X bigger or smaller than .7X? Thank you.

TimeKoder13

2008 February 18th, 11:01

OK, got it, but why is everyone getting .45X lenses instead of the bigger ones...I know it's not cost since a bigger Merkury is way less than the Canon W43.

4get it, I just realized the other ones aren't X45 but the bigger ones.

Aqua Luminous

2008 February 18th, 15:19

Would some one post the outer dimensions @ the front of the Canon WD-H43 edge to edge, as well as the length. I dont have one available and I want to know if it will fit inside a Ikelite Underwater housing. I didnt find any manf. info on the web.

Thanks
-Scott

zephyrnoid

2008 February 18th, 22:49

I sold mine but as I recall- the outer diameter of the front end is 85mm. You can check around the forum for confirmation
Would some one post the outer dimensions @ the front of the Canon WD-H43 edge to edge, as well as the length. I dont have one available and I want to know if it will fit inside a Ikelite Underwater housing. I didnt find any manf. info on the web.

Thanks
-Scott

jdog35

2008 March 13th, 03:28

Not to stir a hornet's nest by any means, but is there a benefit to the 58mm Raynox wide-angle on BH Photo compared to the 52mm used in the shootout? Any thoughts/input?

zephyrnoid

2008 March 13th, 13:46

Short answer is NO. They are THE SAME LENS with different rear mounts. why bother with 58, when 52 will do?

Not to stir a hornet's nest by any means, but is there a benefit to the 58mm Raynox wide-angle on BH Photo compared to the 52mm used in the shootout? Any thoughts/input?

somekevinguy

2008 March 13th, 15:57

So why does the 52 with adapter work better than the native 43, or does it?

zephyrnoid

2008 March 13th, 23:13

What do you mean by native 43? Please look to my review page for further answers to your questions...
http://www.imagometrics.com/FLReviews/HV20_Wide.htm

So why does the 52 with adapter work better than the native 43, or does it?

somekevinguy

2008 March 14th, 12:02

Yes I have previously read your review page as well as a ton of your posts and found them very helpful. What I mean is you were saying that there isn't a benefit of getting the 58 over the 52 so why not just get the 43 so you don't have to used the adapter? I think you explained it earlier in this thread but my head started to hurt when I read it. Maybe you can break it down for me a little bit. Your review actually caused me to order a Raynox 6600Pro 52mm before the Canon WDH43 that I had already ordered even arrived and I will be returning that one. With your nod to the Raynox and the fact that I have an HV30 so the black Raynox lens will match and it is a lot cheaper it seemed like a no brainer. I also ordered that 72mm hood from ebay that was referenced in this thread too. Do you know what I can use as a lens cap with that hood installed? I actually bought the kit from BH that came with the step ring and in the photo it showed a Raynox ring so I thought that is what I was getting but then when I got order confirmation email it listed the generic ring and I noticed on Raynox's website you should use their ring or image quality might be degraded. :( So to summarize since I kind of rambled, since there is no benefit from going from 52 to 58, is there a benefit from going from 43 to 52? What can I use as a lens cap with that hood installed? Do you think I am going to have a degraded image using the generic step ring instead of the Raynox one? Also on a side note if I want to use a polarizing filter or ND filter, etc do I need to buy a 72 and put it on front of the WA lens or can I just use a 43 in between the WA and the camera? I also ordered a 43 B&W multi coated UV haze filter for like $30+ and I think I am going to leave the WA on most of the time so I am thinking I might have wasted $30 there. I look forward to any knowledge you can share on these subjects oh Jedi Master.

somekevinguy

2008 March 15th, 11:07

zephyrnoid, did I scare you away with my ignorance?

_gl

2008 March 15th, 15:49

zephyrnoid, did I scare you away with my ignorance?

You kinda overloaded that post a bit, it tends to turn people off. Try getting your questions clearer in your head, then post them in a few sentences.

zephyrnoid

2008 March 15th, 18:07

somekevinguy

2008 March 15th, 22:18

You kinda overloaded that post a bit, it tends to turn people off. Try getting your questions clearer in your head, then post them in a few sentences.Maybe I should just re-quote the last part of my post where I owned up to rambling and summarized my four questions in four sentences.

somekevinguy

2008 March 15th, 22:39

It's part of my job to spend A LOT of time on forums. I can't share what I actually do for fear of scarring people off, but no your post was not too long, but it it did demonstrate how ineffective the vBulletin discussion thread model actually is for KM.
Here's the short answer.
1) In comparing the identical HD6600Pro lenses, with either the 52 or 58 mm mount, there is NO difference in final quality of using a 43>52 vs a 43>58 adapter. Take your pick. Doesn't matter
HOWEVER
2) There's a BIG difference between the Raynox lenses and the Canon HD43. That is implicit in my clinical evaluation. In your text you DO NOT clarify exactly which lenses you are talking about. This results in a needless repartee- not something I have a huge time for.
If this is still not clear, no doubt some of the others can clarify it for you.
With regard to filter- answers are also plentiful in other threads. I refuse to reiterate them.

1) What I was asking is if there is no difference using a 58mm with adapter or a 52mm with adapter is there a difference in just using the 43mm in the first place with no adapter. I didn't understand if size doesn't make a difference than why not just get the 43mm one in the first place.

2) I thought I said exactly which lenses I was talking about here. Maybe I am still not understanding what you mean.

Your review actually caused me to order a Raynox 6600Pro 52mm before the Canon WDH43 that I had already ordered even arrived and I will be returning that one.

The Raynox site also said using a third party adapter ring instead of Raynox brand could cause image degradation so I was also asking about that since BH shipped me a generic one even though they showed a Raynox one in the picture online.

I also asked about lens cap options with the 72mm ebay hood that you and another poster were discussing earlier in this thread. I have since received the hood and it is obvious that I would have to find a slip on cap because there is no threads on the front of the hood.

As far as the filters I admit it is off topic in this thread. I have probably spent about 20 hours going through this site so far and hadn't seen my question answered yet but I will keep looking as long as the wife will tolerate.

somekevinguy

2008 March 15th, 23:04

I typed "72mm filter" into the search hoping to get threads specifically about filters with the wide angle lens and I only got 23 threads and read every one and some of them seemed to go unanswered and then some seemed to get about a 50/50 response as to weather to put them in front of the WA or behind it or if a UV filter was needed at all between a WA and the camera. I guess it will remain a mystery. The main thing I think I want from a filter are nice shots that aren't washed out or hazy in bright sunlight say at the beach or lake or something. I don't know if I wasted my money on the $30+ 43mm multi coated UV filter for that or if I should have gotten a ND filter or polarizing filter????

raka

2008 March 16th, 18:08

Question for SOMEKEVINGUY: i'm looking at getting the same Raynox b&h kit (6600 52mm + step-up ring)

Q: what is the extension distance of the 43-52 step-up ring you got from b&h?

Raynox recommends their own step-up ring, BUT since it has no optics, the ONLY relevant factor can be how far away from the HV30 lens it places the WA lens.

RAYNOX: RA5243A 43-52mm 7mm high Metal

Raynox gives the spec of their ring as 7mm - do you mind measuring your b&h kit ring & let me know how much of an extension it provides (how close to 7mm is it?)?

thks!

somekevinguy

2008 March 16th, 20:05

Using my calipers it is .385" (9.779mm) total thickness edge to edge, .169" (4.292mm) thickness from rear step face to 52mm front edge. That is what I was figuring too is that the Raynox just has the optimal spacing. Since the ring bottoms out on the face and not the threads the total thickness might not come into play because an extra thread could just be eaten up by the camera instead of spacing the lens out further. So the back face of the WA lens excluding the threads is about 4.292mm from the front face of the camera.

sandries

2008 March 20th, 05:31

Hi guys, How would the Raynox DCR730 (http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/dcr/dcr730/index.htm) compare to the DCR-6600PRO ?

fantomaz

2008 March 20th, 17:51

hi,
yes its all about the thickness of the stepup ring. (not the part with the thread which goes into the lense). i have two different 43 52 stepup rings, one is 3mm (hama) and one 4mm (fox). maybe somebody has a raynox ring to measure out the "female part" of the ring? would be interesting....

on the raynox site they show the difference between the 43mm version and the 52mm raynox 6600. open both pics zoom in and compare. you can see that the 52mm version plus stepupring is much sharper at the edges. however if you look very accurate you can see that the 43mm version is a little sharper in the middle. (above the frame)

52mm: http://raynox.co.jp/actualimage/video/hv20/hv20_hd6600pro52_parkf2.jpg
43mm:
http://raynox.co.jp/actualimage/video/hv20/hv20_hd6600pro43_parkf2.jpg

regards
fz

Status

2008 March 20th, 20:09

What lens hood is everyone using on wide angle lenses? Other than mattlebox.

zephyrnoid

2008 March 20th, 20:21

If it's a 72mm front end, I used to use a round metal hood. In fact it's available in the trades section.

What lens hood is everyone using on wide angle lenses? Other than mattlebox.

nolonemo

2008 March 20th, 20:49

on the raynox site they show the difference between the 43mm version and the 52mm raynox 6600. open both pics zoom in and compare. you can see that the 52mm version plus stepupring is much sharper at the edges. however if you look very accurate you can see that the 43mm version is a little sharper in the middle.

Great find! I had wondered about this, and these pix seal the deal. The great increase in quality at the edges is well worth the slight softenss in the middle.

somekevinguy

2008 March 21st, 13:35

What lens hood is everyone using on wide angle lenses? Other than mattlebox.I bought the metal hood that zephyrnoid said that he used earlier in this thread but now it looks like he is selling his. If you go back a few pages there is a ebay link to it. I just wish I could find a slip on lens cap to fit over the hood. I measured mine and couldn't find anything at B&H that sounded like it would fit.
Right now I either need to remove the hood or leave the lens exposed.

AtomicEagle

2008 March 25th, 00:10

I've been dinking around thinking about what WA adapter to buy and I went to visit my parents and was rummaging through my dad's old camera stuff and came upon my parent's old VHS camera. Inside the case there were two adapter lenses that came with the camera generically labeled "Wide Angle Lens" and "Telephoto Lens"...both black with no manufacturer on them. As far as I can tell they work perfectly with my HV20. I need to pull some footage into post to make sure there was no vignetting, but as far as I can tell it holds focus pretty well with minimal loss of edge sharpness. I'll put up some footage once I get around to it.

moya

2008 April 23rd, 12:40

I got my new Raynox 6600 today and did a little test before I put it on for good. The cheaper price, marginally better reviews, smaller size, and front threads made me go for the raynox. Specifically it's the Raynox HD-6600Pro 52mm. Bought it with the step up ring from BH for $139 with the step up ring included. They're selling the lens with NO step up ring for the same price. Odd.

For my test I looked at two different areas of my house where the wide angle would give me options that I couldn't even have with the built-in lens. Take a look!

http://www.vimeo.com/664806

Just wanted to say thanks for posting your "with/without" video on Vimeo. Short, simple and to the point. I wasn't sure if I should get the Raynox 6600, but you convinced me. :hv20-smilie77: Got it from Alphaelectronics, $140 shipped, step-up ring included. Great customer service, BTW.

zephyrnoid

2008 April 23rd, 12:54

Just search this site to find my lens-cap solution for the hood. OK. I'll try to find it for you in DIY...:hv20-smilie51:
I bought the metal hood that zephyrnoid said that he used earlier in this thread but now it looks like he is selling his. If you go back a few pages there is a ebay link to it. I just wish I could find a slip on lens cap to fit over the hood. I measured mine and couldn't find anything at B&H that sounded like it would fit.
Right now I either need to remove the hood or leave the lens exposed.

RockStar

2008 April 27th, 13:48

I was trying to find the 6600 after reading the awesome review from Zep. Thanks again for doing that brother. Does anyone know where to get one in stock? Alpha showed backorder on there site, B&H did also? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks again and love the forum and my new HV30.

zephyrnoid

2008 April 27th, 14:39

How about....
http://www.adorama.com/RXHD6600P55.html?searchinfo=raynox%20HD6600%20pro&item_no=4

Same lens. you just need a different ring:hv20-smilie77:

I was trying to find the 6600 after reading the awesome review from Zep. Thanks again for doing that brother. Does anyone know where to get one in stock? Alpha showed backorder on there site, B&H did also? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks again and love the forum and my new HV30.

moya

2008 April 28th, 03:37

V10TDI

2008 April 28th, 22:50

Compromise is the key.

I own both the Canon WD-H43 and the Raynox 6600 (52mm) and I'm not really satisfied with either lens. The Canon lens has great zoom-thru, but no front threads and a bit too much barrel distortion on the wide setting (which is why I bought a wide angle lens in the first place). The Raynox 6600 (52mm) gives a great picture at the wide angle (much less barrel distortion) and has front threads, but introduces too much blur/smearing when zoomed in more than ~7x.

What .7 (or better) lens gives great images throughout the zoom range and front threads? Currently I favor the 6600 and just remove it when zooming in >7x - but I'd rather find a wide angle lens that I can leave on all of the time.

Ten Ounce

2008 April 28th, 22:55

@RockStar: I ordered my 6600 Pro 52mm from Alpha on Friday and I was having trouble getting it to show up on their webiste. I.E. searching directly on their website wouldn't find it but Googling "6600 Pro Alphaelectronics" brought me directly to the page.

I added to my cart and the purchase went thru. I also emailed their customer service and got a very fast and courteous response that the order did go thru and was processing.

Maybe you should email them and ask?

Whoa, I never knew you could get to the product via Google. Thanks for the heads up.

I would say 90% of the products on the member page on Alpha Electronics are part of a "private catalog", which means it won't show up to regular browsers of the site. You have to go via the link in my signature.

moya

2008 April 29th, 02:20

Thanks, Ten Ounce; I didn't realize that there were "members only" pages. That's really cool. :hv20-smilie110: Thanks again for the great customer service; very refreshing in this day and age.

zephyrnoid

2008 April 29th, 09:28

Not to doubt your opinion, but based on my test, which is up for all to see, there is no such "blur/smearing when zoomed in more than ~7x" on the 6600. Can you please show us your test results? Mine are here...
http://www.imagometrics.com/FLReviews/HV20_Wide.htm
Are you holding manual focus or using Auto Focus when zooming in ?
Wide-angle lenses may cause the auto focus system to 'hunt'. THAT may well be the cause of your blur/smearing during a zoom sequence. Please help me understand. Thanks!

Compromise is the key.

I own both the Canon WD-H43 and the Raynox 6600 (52mm) and I'm not really satisfied with either lens. The Canon lens has great zoom-thru, but no front threads and a bit too much barrel distortion on the wide setting (which is why I bought a wide angle lens in the first place). The Raynox 6600 (52mm) gives a great picture at the wide angle (much less barrel distortion) and has front threads, but introduces too much blur/smearing when zoomed in more than ~7x.

What .7 (or better) lens gives great images throughout the zoom range and front threads? Currently I favor the 6600 and just remove it when zooming in >7x - but I'd rather find a wide angle lens that I can leave on all of the time.

V10TDI

2008 April 29th, 22:59

Not to doubt your opinion, but based on my test, which is up for all to see, there is no such "blur/smearing when zoomed in more than ~7x" on the 6600. Can you please show us your test results? Mine are here...

The smearing that I have observed with my 6600 lens (zoom > ~7x) appear exactly like the images on the Raynox web site. The center of the zoomed image is relatively clean, but the edges are blurred/smeared. On the other hand, the zoomed images through the WD-H43 appear sharp at all points.

Here's a link to the 10x zoomed image from the Raynox web site showing what I'm trying to describe:
http://raynox.co.jp/actualimage/video/hv20/hv20_hd6600pro_park10x.jpg

Note that I am not faulting the Raynox 6600 lens - Raynox clearly specifies that the 6600 lens is only appropriate for 1x-6x zoom.
http://raynox.co.jp/english/video/hv20/index.htm

I'm just looking for a wide angle lens that does a bit better when on full zoom and has front threads. I was thinking about the Raynox HD-7000, but I can't judge the barrel distortion/smearing from the pictures that Raynox has posted (they aren't the same pictures as for the 6600 lens).

_gl

2008 April 30th, 05:49

The smearing that I have observed with my 6600 lens (zoom > ~7x) appear exactly like the images on the Raynox web site. The center of the zoomed image is relatively clean, but the edges are blurred/smeared. On the other hand, the zoomed images through the WD-H43 appear sharp at all points.

I suspect there's a lens-design tradeoff going on here between barrel distortion and edge blurring.

V10TDI

2008 April 30th, 18:50

I suspect there's a lens-design tradeoff going on here between barrel distortion and edge blurring.

Yes, I think you are correct. I started my post with the "compromise" theme...but, I'm still looking for a better compromise. :)

msb

2008 May 8th, 12:05

Ten Ounce

2008 May 8th, 12:19

Thanks for this thread and all the great comments and comparisons here on HV20 forums. I ordered and received a Raynox DCR6600PRO-52 after reading all around here about it. So I figured this was a good place to post about a short I shot for its glorious arrival. :hv20-smilie72:

So here's a link to the video of the lens arrival (a little scary) followed by me geeking out about it some. Enjoy.

http://www.vimeo.com/989566

-Mike

I liked that video. Kinda relaxed me with that elevator music. :hv20-smilie81: That was a pretty crappy packing job though, but fortunately the lens is pretty well protected in that box.

moya

2008 May 8th, 13:39

Cool video, MSB/Mike. The elevator music was actually perfect for that video due to there being no narration. That packing job sucked; why did they even bother putting ANY peanuts in there at all? What's the point of putting like, 5 peanuts in there? Duh. Glad the lens was OK.

paulio

2008 May 8th, 16:12

MSB/Mike,

where did you order it from?

9ghv30

2008 May 8th, 21:41

looks like from amazon.

msb

2008 May 8th, 21:55

moya,
The title of that music is 'Let's Fall in Love'. Its subliminal and corresponds to loving the new lens and opening it in the bedroom. hehe. (Yes, I know I'm odd.)

Paulio,
I ordered it through Amazon from one of the marketplace vendors. He apparently drop ships these so he doesn't pack them himself.

'redhotbuys' I believe was the name on Amazon. I can't complain about his customer service as he upgraded the shipment to overnight when it was delayed and he returned my emails. He also is intent (according to his emails) about fixing the packaging problems that have recently plagued him. Thus reason 1 for the video to help him see the extent of the problem.

-Mike (msb)