Which wide angle? Price vs Quality?

yzmotoxer807

yzmotoxer807

Well-known member
Ok so I am going to be purchasing a DVX and I will be getting a wide angle lens for indoor shooting. The problem is that I have narrowed it down to four lenses that are in my price range and I was wondering what to do.

First off, the Panasonic (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/282864-REG/Panasonic_AG_LW7208G_0_8x_Wide_Angle_Converter.html) is the cheapest and if it is any good, I will probably go with that one. But, is it any good? I understand that it is only .8X wide as opposed to many other .7X or .6X lenses out there but that doesn't matter to me. Is it any good?

The second lens that I narrowed down to is the 16x9 Inc. .7X (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...V7X1_HDV7X1_0_7_Wide_Angle.html#goto_itemInfo). This one looks good to me and I have heard and read many good things about it, but it is $100 more than the Panasonic and I don't have very much to spend on accessories. If this lens is much better than the Panasonic then I am willing to pay for it. Is it worth the extra $100?

The third and fourth lenses that I narrowed it down to are the Century Precision Optics .8X (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ptics_VS08CV72_0_8x_Wide_Angle_Converter.html) and the Century Precision Optics .7X that is made specifically for the DVX (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...s_0VS_07CV_DVX_0_7x_Wide_Angle_Converter.html). I really don't see much difference in these two other than the fact that one is .7X and one is .8X. There is a $100 difference in price though which I don't understand. The .7X that is made for the DVX is bayonet mounted too. Does this mean that it mounts to where the lens hood would go? If so then I don't want it because I would like to use 72mm filters and not have to get bigger filters to fit the front of the wide angle lens. Also, these two are much more expensive than the Panasonic or the 16x9 Inc. lenses. Are they that much better or is it not worth the price difference?

Any help with this is greatly appreciated thanks.
 
I haven't used the other W/A converters, but I have one of the Century Optics .7 converters for my Canon XL1s and I am more than pleased with it. I compared the 16x Canon zoom with and without the adapter using a resolution chart and there was very little difference other than a slight amount of barrel distortion at the wide point. It even held up well at the full tele position.

It bayonets on to the front of the lens, which is much, much better than screwing it in: the mount is stronger and there's no chance of cross-threading. The downside is you can't use it on another model lens.

BTW, you do not, repeat do not, want to use a filter between your camera lens and any W/A converter. Not good from a resolution standpoint as it changes the distance from the rear element of the converter to the front element of the lens plus it adds another piece of glass to the equation. Filters always go on the front of the lens or converter unless it's a lens-specific filter that goes into a slot at the rear of the lens.

The Century converter sells for about $800 but I found a pristine one on eBay for half that amount.
 
The Panasonic .8 is full zoom through. The century .6x is not, but it's cheaper and great quality (lots of barrel distortion at full wide though). The century .7 is a mediocre product with lousy edge sharpness, even though it's full zoom through. The 16x9 is also full zoom through, it's great at wide angle, not so good at telephoto.

If you need full zoom through I say go with the 16x9 or Panasonic. If you don't need full zoom, go with the Century .6.
 
I don't see why you would want to use full zoom with a WA lens on in the first place. It sort of defeats the purpose of having it on. WA lenses work best at full wide and get to the subject as close as possible to frame the shot correctly. You can't really have a wide angle zoom through lense, you either want a nice panoramic wide shot or a close up?? Put on a 2x tele for zooming through and effectively extend the optical range to 20x on the DVX. The other problem is what Barry said, WA lenses dramatically lose their edge focus at full zoom, this is because they are not designed for this. And you won't really find too many lenses that can do this anyway and if they can they are damn expensive. I have a $300 Raynox that I put on my GS300 when I use it and its not too flash when you zoom all the way in.
Cheers Shaun
PS Barry, I got your book and DVD coming, can't wait.
 
Ok so I guess what I am asking now is which is more worth it? The 16x9 inc. or the Panasonic? I kind of want to stay away from the Century's because from what I've heard they either lose edge sharpness or distort at full wide. This is not what I want. I am buying the wide angle lens to be at full or almost full wide for some fairly close indoor shots.

Now, the Panasonic is cheaper and my budget is not very big. But if the 16x9 is worth the extra $100 I will gladly pay for it. So, the differences that I see in just the specs are that the 16x9 is .1X wider and is $100 more. Also, from the pictures that I have seen, it does not look like the Panasonic has threads on the front and Mike Parker (above) said that you should not use filters in between the wide angle and the camera.

Main questions:
- Does the Panasonic have threads on the front?
- Is the 16x9 Inc. better in terms of lens/glass quality?
- Is the 16x9 Inc. worth the extra $100 over the Panasonic?
 
>>>I don't see why you would want to use full zoom with a WA lens on in the first place. It sort of defeats the purpose of having it on.<<<

In a perfect world, you're right, but having full zoom capabilities is almost essential for news, doc and reality work. My Century .8x wide angle converter was almost permanently attached to my Betacam zoom lens when I was shooting in Los Angeles, especially for both OJ trials.

Also, regarding Barry's comment that the Century .7x converter has "lousy edge sharpness", I've yet to hear any complaints from my paying clients. I much prefer it to Canon's 3x wide-angle lens (which I have also owned) because of the Canon lens' limited zoom range.
 
Mike Parker said:
>>>I don't see why you would want to use full zoom with a WA lens on in the first place. It sort of defeats the purpose of having it on.<<<

In a perfect world, you're right, but having full zoom capabilities is almost essential for news, doc and reality work. My Century .8x wide angle converter was almost permanently attached to my Betacam zoom lens when I was shooting in Los Angeles, especially for both OJ trials.

Also, regarding Barry's comment that the Century .7x converter has "lousy edge sharpness", I've yet to hear any complaints from my paying clients. I much prefer it to Canon's 3x wide-angle lens (which I have also owned) because of the Canon lens' limited zoom range.
Click to expand...
Hi Mike, yes in a perfect world cause we can't allways shoot 3 feet from our subjects at full wide open. Every lens has its "sweet spot" and my point was really that WA lenses don't really work best on the narrow end and the ones that do are the hi end lenses which cost a fair bit of coin. If I must shoot at full zoom I attach a tele.
 
Okay so besides arguing about what to use the lenses for (I am perfectly capable with arguing with myself about that:2vrolijk_08:), does anyone have an answer to my last post? Please?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top