Mike Beckett
Well-known member
This is a mini (and amateur) review of the Century 0.65x wide angle lens for the HMC40/41 camcorders (model# 0HD-65CV-43). I don't profess to be an expert in lens technology, so take anything I say with a pinch of salt and please don't be too hard on me if I have made any mistakes.
First, physical attributes. This is a nice-looking piece of glass, not too heavy (240g, 8.5 oz), and it fits directly to the 43mm filter thread on the HMC4x. It has an outer diameter of 70mm (for clamp-on hoods etc.) and an outer filter size of 67mm.
The first two photos show the lens on the camera, a three-quarters shot and a side elevation. It is relatively compact:
The filter can be used to attach a hood. I am starting with the Hama rubber hood shown in the second pair of photos. Model# 093167, designed for 24-35mm lenses. I haven't got a lot to say about that yet as I haven't experimented with lens flare yet. It accentuates the lovely 1980s look of this camera!
The adapter is multi-element and fully zoom through, so you don't risk going out of focus when you go past Z60-ish.
Now, picture quality. First, barrel distortion. At 0.65x, there is a fair bit of this, but it's actually not too bad or too noticeable in most situations. Pointing it at a brick wall will of course make it obvious.
This is actually a bit disappointing, though it's no worse than the Red Eye adapter I had on my last Sony camera. There's a fair bit of softness in the corners, though it is not as bad when you go to zoom level Z10 or stop down the iris to f10 or so. This isn't always practical, especially in dark and wet Ireland, so you may have to live with the softness.
Softness is the same whether you have the "inner lens hood" on or off.
With the ATR875R short shotgun mic with Rycote Softie on the XLR adapter, I do get a few fuzzy hairs in the top right of the picture at widest angle. Other mics or windshields may differ.
Test 1: "wideness"
The first two images are a simple comparison of the wideness of the lens, shot at 720p. I didn't take too much care over the iris setting or trying to work at the softness in the corners in this one. The camera is set up on the tripod tight against the foot of the bed:
Default HMC41 wide angle: BMP | JPG
HMC41 with 0.65x at Z00: BMP | JPG
All other shots are with the WA adapter on the camera, at 1080p. Images are full size, with an extra bar along the bottom with the camera settings.
Conclusion: really good wide angle without too much barrel distortion, considering. Definitely need to keep an eye on doors, walls etc.
Test 2 - Iris at f10:
The next test was a comparison of a fairly open iris with one at f10, as suggested by Bob. Both shots at Z00:
f3.6: BMP | JPG
f10: BMP | JPG
Conclusion: I think the corners are less soft at f10. I don't think I could work at f10 without a LOT of extra light, which isn't practical for run & gun. That sample was shot at a stupid shutter speed of 1/6!
Test 3 - range of iris settings:
This test takes the same shot and goes from an almost open iris to an almost closed iris. I adjusted frame rate to keep exposure under control, but still stuffed up the first one a bit, sorry!
f1.9 BMP | JPG
f4.2 BMP | JPG
f5.6 BMP | JPG
f8.5 BMP | JPG
f9.6 BMP | JPG
Conclusion: Leaving aside the poor exposure of the first shot, comparing f9.6 to f1.9 shows that the picture is sharper at f10. Again, I don't think f10 is practical at all times, especially as I had to use a shutter speed of 1/12 to get decent exposure in daylight!
Test 4 - range at different zoom settings:
This test takes the same shot and goes from an almost open iris to an almost closed iris. I adjusted frame rate to keep exposure under control, but still stuffed up the first one a bit, sorry! All are at round about f4 to f4.5:
Z00 BMP | JPG
Z10 BMP | JPG
Z20 BMP | JPG
Z30 BMP | JPG
Z40 BMP | JPG
Z50 BMP | JPG
Z60 BMP | JPG
Z70 BMP | JPG
Z80 BMP | JPG
Z90 BMP | JPG
Z99 BMP | JPG
Conclusion: Z20 and above loses the softness round the corners, although that negates the point of the WA adapter! Z30 thru Z99 are good, I think. At Z90 and Z99 it is pretty hard to get good focus across the entire image because the depth of focus is seems very shallow, at least in my set-up.
Overall conclusion:
I admit to a bit of disappointment with the softness in the image, given the price of the lens, but it is useful and does not hamper my efforts to zoom. I did show the pictures to some "normal" people, and they couldn't see a problem - so maybe we worry too much. Assuming I'm not doing anything wrong, Bob's tests with the 0.5x look a bit sharper than mine.
I'll not be keeping it on the camera all the time, but it will be useful for special applications. For example, a tour round a steam railway workshop a couple of weeks ago was tricky with the 41mm default lens on the HMC41. I'll keep this to hand in my backpack any time I'm out and about, that's for sure.
I'm sure there's better, more thorough tests that could be run - and I'm open to suggestions. But hopefully this has been useful.
Positives:
+ Good wide angle 0.65x gives you 26.65mm at widest angle
+ Fully zoom-through, no accidentally going out of focus halfway through the zoom range
+ Filter thread for hood (or filters, if you are mad)
+ Not too heavy, considering the size of it
Negatives:
- Softness in corners, especially at wider iris settings
- More expensive than some of the alternatives
First, physical attributes. This is a nice-looking piece of glass, not too heavy (240g, 8.5 oz), and it fits directly to the 43mm filter thread on the HMC4x. It has an outer diameter of 70mm (for clamp-on hoods etc.) and an outer filter size of 67mm.
The first two photos show the lens on the camera, a three-quarters shot and a side elevation. It is relatively compact:
The filter can be used to attach a hood. I am starting with the Hama rubber hood shown in the second pair of photos. Model# 093167, designed for 24-35mm lenses. I haven't got a lot to say about that yet as I haven't experimented with lens flare yet. It accentuates the lovely 1980s look of this camera!
The adapter is multi-element and fully zoom through, so you don't risk going out of focus when you go past Z60-ish.
Now, picture quality. First, barrel distortion. At 0.65x, there is a fair bit of this, but it's actually not too bad or too noticeable in most situations. Pointing it at a brick wall will of course make it obvious.
This is actually a bit disappointing, though it's no worse than the Red Eye adapter I had on my last Sony camera. There's a fair bit of softness in the corners, though it is not as bad when you go to zoom level Z10 or stop down the iris to f10 or so. This isn't always practical, especially in dark and wet Ireland, so you may have to live with the softness.
Softness is the same whether you have the "inner lens hood" on or off.
With the ATR875R short shotgun mic with Rycote Softie on the XLR adapter, I do get a few fuzzy hairs in the top right of the picture at widest angle. Other mics or windshields may differ.
Test 1: "wideness"
The first two images are a simple comparison of the wideness of the lens, shot at 720p. I didn't take too much care over the iris setting or trying to work at the softness in the corners in this one. The camera is set up on the tripod tight against the foot of the bed:
Default HMC41 wide angle: BMP | JPG
HMC41 with 0.65x at Z00: BMP | JPG
All other shots are with the WA adapter on the camera, at 1080p. Images are full size, with an extra bar along the bottom with the camera settings.
Conclusion: really good wide angle without too much barrel distortion, considering. Definitely need to keep an eye on doors, walls etc.
Test 2 - Iris at f10:
The next test was a comparison of a fairly open iris with one at f10, as suggested by Bob. Both shots at Z00:
f3.6: BMP | JPG
f10: BMP | JPG
Conclusion: I think the corners are less soft at f10. I don't think I could work at f10 without a LOT of extra light, which isn't practical for run & gun. That sample was shot at a stupid shutter speed of 1/6!
Test 3 - range of iris settings:
This test takes the same shot and goes from an almost open iris to an almost closed iris. I adjusted frame rate to keep exposure under control, but still stuffed up the first one a bit, sorry!
f1.9 BMP | JPG
f4.2 BMP | JPG
f5.6 BMP | JPG
f8.5 BMP | JPG
f9.6 BMP | JPG
Conclusion: Leaving aside the poor exposure of the first shot, comparing f9.6 to f1.9 shows that the picture is sharper at f10. Again, I don't think f10 is practical at all times, especially as I had to use a shutter speed of 1/12 to get decent exposure in daylight!
Test 4 - range at different zoom settings:
This test takes the same shot and goes from an almost open iris to an almost closed iris. I adjusted frame rate to keep exposure under control, but still stuffed up the first one a bit, sorry! All are at round about f4 to f4.5:
Z00 BMP | JPG
Z10 BMP | JPG
Z20 BMP | JPG
Z30 BMP | JPG
Z40 BMP | JPG
Z50 BMP | JPG
Z60 BMP | JPG
Z70 BMP | JPG
Z80 BMP | JPG
Z90 BMP | JPG
Z99 BMP | JPG
Conclusion: Z20 and above loses the softness round the corners, although that negates the point of the WA adapter! Z30 thru Z99 are good, I think. At Z90 and Z99 it is pretty hard to get good focus across the entire image because the depth of focus is seems very shallow, at least in my set-up.
Overall conclusion:
I admit to a bit of disappointment with the softness in the image, given the price of the lens, but it is useful and does not hamper my efforts to zoom. I did show the pictures to some "normal" people, and they couldn't see a problem - so maybe we worry too much. Assuming I'm not doing anything wrong, Bob's tests with the 0.5x look a bit sharper than mine.
I'll not be keeping it on the camera all the time, but it will be useful for special applications. For example, a tour round a steam railway workshop a couple of weeks ago was tricky with the 41mm default lens on the HMC41. I'll keep this to hand in my backpack any time I'm out and about, that's for sure.
I'm sure there's better, more thorough tests that could be run - and I'm open to suggestions. But hopefully this has been useful.
Positives:
+ Good wide angle 0.65x gives you 26.65mm at widest angle
+ Fully zoom-through, no accidentally going out of focus halfway through the zoom range
+ Filter thread for hood (or filters, if you are mad)
+ Not too heavy, considering the size of it
Negatives:
- Softness in corners, especially at wider iris settings
- More expensive than some of the alternatives
