Sample Images with and without WD-H43 Wide Angle Lens

**Lunchbox** · 2007 May 23rd, 00:09

Just got it today. It's really a solid built with high quality optics. It's heavy and the color is more like a charcoal metallic grey than the cheap plastic silver HV20 is.

The lens weighted almost 1 lbs makes the camera really heavy in the front. The lens also blocks the built-in light and the flash light. Object will show up like moon elipse when you try to use either one.

With this wide angle lens attached to the front, my HV20 doesn't look that amature anymore. I am thinking of adding the Canon DM50 microphone later.

Taky

**Rikki** · 2007 May 23rd, 10:41

Agreed. It weighs more than the cam nearly LOL. It's very solid, having used Raynox products in the past. I've got a video light too on the top which makes the thing look a bit bulkier too

**Critters** · 2007 May 23rd, 11:38

Any chance of uploading some test footage? Pretty please

**BarnOwl** · 2007 May 23rd, 12:57

Can you post a picture of the camera with the wide angle on?

**David Susilo** · 2007 May 24th, 08:04

can be seen here:

http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?t=364

**retired26** · 2007 May 24th, 08:38

Taky

So how do you like the WD-H43 so far? I can't seem to find one anywhere
that's in stock except fot amazon who wants a lot for it.

JW

**David Susilo** · 2007 May 24th, 09:01

I can help you buy the WD-H43 from my (now) friend's store. I just picked up mine for approx US$200. Shipping to the US with insurance is about US$20 I think.

If you're interested, I'm willing to help anybody on this forum to pick up and ship WD-H43. Just pay me whatever amount I pay plus PayPal fees (whatever percentage that is) or send me International Money Order.

as mentioned in a different thread, I'm NOT making any money out of this, just trying to help.

**Lunchbox** · 2007 May 24th, 12:26

Here's some shots with and without the WD-H43 lens.

Pics showing using flash or the built-in light while the WA lens is attached

**bluegrass** · 2007 May 24th, 13:25

[QUOTE=Taky;2515]Here's some shots with and without the WD-H43 lens. The last two showing how it would be like using flash or the built-in light.

Here kitty kitty. How did you get the cat to freeze in the same position while you attached or removed the wide angle lens?

Thanks for the photos. With and without the WD-H43.

**Critters** · 2007 May 24th, 13:30

Originally Posted by bluegrass

How did you get the cat to freeze in the same position while you attached or removed the wide angle lens?

Looks like they both have the lens on as they both have the shadow.

**Lunchbox** · 2007 May 25th, 14:53

[QUOTE=bluegrass;2523]

Originally Posted by Taky

Here's some shots with and without the WD-H43 lens. The last two showing how it would be like using flash or the built-in light.

Here kitty kitty. How did you get the cat to freeze in the same position while you attached or removed the wide angle lens?

Thanks for the photos. With and without the WD-H43.

hehe! I just need to keep talking to her in Chinese. She will be frozen and just look at me.

**miglo** · 2007 May 25th, 22:01

Is that fully zoomed out? Did you notice barrel distortion? I get it on mine.

*EDIT: After playing around with it some more, I guess its not too terrible.

**Lunchbox** · 2007 May 25th, 22:10

It is all the way zoom out. I noticed the barrel distortion but I found it's kind of cool

**balloonball** · 2007 May 27th, 12:38

That was awesome of you to post those shots. I love wide angle and find it far more useful for most of my needs (which aren't many, mind you). Does the HV20 look strange with that lens on her? Is the front so heavy that it makes the strap drag to the front?

Speaking of that strap, anyone know of a replacement strap for the HV20...something a bit more substantial?

Again, thanks Taky. Very helpful images.

Balloonball

**Lunchbox** · 2007 May 27th, 12:44

The front does a lot heavier now. But WA lens ia really necessary as you can see a lot more especially in a 16:9 aspect ratio.

Besides, the WA lens is also for cosmetic for me. As I will be using the camera in weddings, I need to make the camera less amature looking. For that reason, I'm thinking of adding the Canon DM-50.

**miglo** · 2007 May 27th, 17:28

Originally Posted by Taky

The front does a lot heavier now. But WA lens ia really necessary as you can see a lot more especially in a 16:9 aspect ratio.

Besides, the WA lens is also for cosmetic for me. As I will be using the camera in weddings, I need to make the camera less amature looking. For that reason, I'm thinking of adding the Canon DM-50.

Get a matteblox like me. It makes it loook...impressive.

**punkie** · 2007 May 29th, 17:27

Hi there - wd-h43 sounds really cool. Thinking about getting one, but i read in the user guide (AF MODE in SETUP MENUS section) that the wide-converter my partially obstruct the Instant AF sensor and that AF should be set to Normal AF is so. Did you have to do this, or do you find Instant AF works fine?

**Lunchbox** · 2007 May 29th, 17:29

I found out the IAF slows down a little bit but it still works fine. I didn't change it to Normal AF as I can't tell much difference.

**David Susilo** · 2007 May 29th, 17:30

You don't really want instant AF. I turn it off at all time. It's really annoying. People walk in front of your camera, and the focus point changes quickly to that person before it changes back to your original subject.

Also because of the wider angle, it "absorbs" more light. Normal AF performance will NOT be affected.

**24Peter** · 2007 May 29th, 22:40

Originally Posted by Taky

I found out the IAF slows down a little bit but it still works fine. I didn't change it to Normal AF as I can't tell much difference.

I'm with Taky on this one - exact same for me. The only difference I think is that sometimes the camera can't focus at the long end of the zoom with the adapter on. I have to recompose my shot or zoom out, then back in. But I say "I think" that's the only difference b/c I haven't taken my WD-H43 off the camera since I got it (which was right after I got the camera itself.) It's that good.

**joseph soriano** · 2007 May 30th, 23:36

anyone have the rear of the wd-h43 attached to a uv filter(or test it out for me)? i would like to have a uv filter attached to the camera at all times and was wondering if there is any vignetting? thanks.

**hizbiz** · 2007 May 31st, 00:07

Originally Posted by joseph soriano

anyone have the rear of the wd-h43 attached to a uv filter(or test it out for me)? i would like to have a uv filter attached to the camera at all times and was wondering if there is any vignetting? thanks.

Hi Joseph,
I can confirm you that I did not see any vignetting issues when I sandwiched a UV/ND8 filter between the camera and WD-H43.
I have shot only video though. Cannot tell anything about stills. If you want I can check that for you too!
Cheers!

**joseph soriano** · 2007 June 1st, 01:26

hizbiz, please do! thanks!

**elmerlang** · 2007 June 3rd, 00:44

@ Taki

I very much appreciate you sharing your photos, but I find it hard to make a comparison between the with and without since no two shots are alike.

It would really be great if you could post a couple shot that appear the same (just get incloser with the w/a, then one could tell how much softer (for instance) the image is with the w/a.

I would like to get one, but what I've seen so far on other forums makes me a bit trepidacious to throw down the cash. I see a soft image that I presently don't wish to settle for.

best,
elmer

**zephyrnoid** · 2007 July 11th, 21:58

Ugh! The barrel distortion is BAD! Thanks for running the side by side though. Now to wait for Century to make a less distorting one

Thread: Sample Images with and without WD-H43 Wide Angle Lens

Thread Tools

Display

Sample Images with and without WD-H43 Wide Angle Lens

Thanks, Taky

instant af sensor

Posting Permissions