GH2 Wide Angle .45x Converter WORKS GREAT!

Started Feb 2, 2011 | Discussions
kurth
Senior MemberPosts: 1,360
Like?
Re: Are all the Opteka .45x HD² Wide Angle Lens the same thred?
In reply to aljudy, Feb 14, 2011

ok those look better - the motorhome and the cars ....but only when the subject is up close - the original street scenes are still bad - and in the cars , the background is also out of focus - don´t know if this is brokeh or the lens isn´t for distance - so maybe it´s a solution for video when the subject is closeup ...but for photography ....maybe for the web ...maybe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mpgxsvcd
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,640Gear list
Like?
Re: Are all the Opteka .45x HD² Wide Angle Lens the same thred?
In reply to kurth, Feb 14, 2011

Yea the out of focus area around the edge is not ideal. However, these adapters are meant for one specific type of picture. That picture is one where the subject is in the center and the outer edges are only useful to give you an idea of what the overall shape is.

For example: in the car photo the eagle and the really cool wheel were the main subjects. I could have shot them at 14mm but you wouldn’t have been able to tell they were on a car. Basically, if you would shoot the picture with such a shallow depth of field that most of the outer edge would be out of focus then these adapters “might” work as well.

These adapters definitely are not meant for pictures that you are going to print. They work well for distributing at small resolutions on the web and the adapters are very useful for video as well. For the $30 I spent I am happy with mine. However, I will buy the 7-14mm with IS or the 12-50mm as soon as they come out. The adapter is just something to get by on until those lenses come out or forever(whichever comes first).

kurth wrote:

ok those look better - the motorhome and the cars ....but only when the subject is up close - the original street scenes are still bad - and in the cars , the background is also out of focus - don´t know if this is brokeh or the lens isn´t for distance - so maybe it´s a solution for video when the subject is closeup ...but for photography ....maybe for the web ...maybe

 mpgxsvcd's gear list:mpgxsvcd's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
J R R S
Senior MemberPosts: 1,336
Like?
Samples from the Olympus WCON-07C.
In reply to James Fisk, Mar 12, 2011

I just got the WCON-07c and went out for a test run.... (I heard good stuff about this one over them all - and it was a full £200 lens normaly - I got it for £50)

Had to super glue a 40.5-52mm filter adaptor to the back of the WA lens to make it fit on my E-P1 kit lens....

Few things to note:

Super glue with loads of ventalation and absolute minimum possible layer of glue - you dont want fume depsots on the lens! - but do it like this and all will be ok!

Second: This lens is (way) too heavy for the kit focus motor!!!!

Don't use AF - you can use MF but you have to twist fastish as this fast turn engages full power to the focus motor rather than a little step... but you will still need to help it by either tilting the camera up or down depending on the direction!

I finaly thought sod it and just grab the lens and twist gently against the motor - As a normal old MF lens - it has a cutout function like a CD draw and won't burn out, also it is position aware so can not be set wrong if the motor loses step sync - but I do this at my own risk and don't advise it rather present it as a possibility! (one that makes this setup slighty usable in a faster way)...

So... nuff talk hear are the results:

This first one is as close as I could go flat on to the grass...

Landscape - note the fade out at the corners - If I file down the 40.5-52 convertor I could get the WA lens about 2mm closer to the front of the kit lens - this should remove all the fadeout... i hope

Keeps the lines quite straight... not much distortion 8.5/10 for this i'de say

Landscape...

The chap on the hill was only about 12m away! - this is 20mm equiv.

detailed lanscape

Nice CA and sharpness test shot... not beyond use with a slight crop - say a usable 22mm!

Over all I'm fairly happy - not a 9-18 replacement but am finding that the amount of use I would get from the 9-18 might be less than I first though - I did find myself coming back to the 28-84 equiv. range quit alot! - I think for the price it does work admaribly well and extend your range into an area you just cannot go without normaly shelling out £££.... If your not shaw about WA this is deffinatly somthing to try for just a few £ to see if you like it or would use it as much as you might think?!

The oly WCON-07 overall ide say 7/10... not dissapointing... just not as good as you might wish - but what is eh

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RayZS
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: GH2 Wide Angle .45x Converter WORKS GREAT!
In reply to James Fisk, Jun 24, 2011

OP: Ignore all the hissy fits about IQ, barrel distortion, etc. It all comes down to the story you're trying to tell. If it's working for you, who cares. Stanley Kubrick, arguably one of the best photographers of ALL time coulda cared less about barrel distortion. And all the prim & proper photo nerds crucified him for his blown out interiors, only to see it become de riguer these days. Lots of hot air on this board.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fransams
Regular MemberPosts: 180
Like?
Re: GH2 Wide Angle .45x Converter WORKS GREAT!
In reply to RayZS, Jun 24, 2011

For US$ 27.- it's more fun than a new Pentax Q.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
eagle_I
Senior MemberPosts: 2,670
Like?
Re: Samples from the Olympus WCON-07C.
In reply to J R R S, Jun 24, 2011

For what it's worth here's the evening view from my deck with the 14-140mm Panny set to 28mm (equiv) on my new GH2.

I occasionally used the Oly WCOM -07 (.7x) on my FZ50. All it cost me was a few bucks for 62 to 55mm step down adapter to try it on the 14-140mm. Here's how it looks at the 28mm setting on the lens. And this time with morning light.

I could zoom-in a bit to minimize the vignetted corners. It's a BIG ol hunk of glass to stick on that lens and I doubt I'll use it much ... tho there is one thing I want to try which is setting it VERY close to my hummingbird feeder and hope some brave birds will come close enough for some HD footage.

Mark
--

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
leafinsectman
Contributing MemberPosts: 763
Like?
Re: Samples from the Olympus WCON-07C.
In reply to eagle_I, Jun 24, 2011

I have some no name 0.45x wide converter that I've used on my 20mm pancake but a) it did not give me a 9mm FOV, b) it's a little heavy and I don't like putting extra weight on the lens, and c) it seemed like a bit of a waste to put something in front of the brilliant 20mm. Still, if you're on a budget and want to go wide, it ain't bad. Maybe invest on one of the better brands if you want better image quality.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
millsart
Senior MemberPosts: 2,771
Like?
Why not use a decent lens on a $1000 camera though ?
In reply to RayZS, Jun 24, 2011

Given there is the excellent 7-14, and the very good 9-18mm, why not use those instead if your going to shoot a flagship $1000 camera ?

Its like putting the cheapest tires possible onto an expensive sports car. Sure they will get you down the road, but your not getting the performance you paid for because the cheap tires are the weak link. You might have 500hp but only can harness 100 before the tires break free

Maybe if you never want to take a wide shot it makes sense, but when there are GOOD lenses and you bought a top of the line camera, why introduce such a weak link ?

RayZS wrote:

OP: Ignore all the hissy fits about IQ, barrel distortion, etc. It all comes down to the story you're trying to tell. If it's working for you, who cares. Stanley Kubrick, arguably one of the best photographers of ALL time coulda cared less about barrel distortion. And all the prim & proper photo nerds crucified him for his blown out interiors, only to see it become de riguer these days. Lots of hot air on this board.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
johnparas11zenfoliodotcom
Senior MemberPosts: 2,193Gear list
Like?
Re: Why not use a decent lens on a $1000 camera though ?
In reply to millsart, Jun 24, 2011

Because itis only $27 vs $900...

millsart wrote:

Given there is the excellent 7-14, and the very good 9-18mm, why not use those instead if your going to shoot a flagship $1000 camera ?

Its like putting the cheapest tires possible onto an expensive sports car. Sure they will get you down the road, but your not getting the performance you paid for because the cheap tires are the weak link. You might have 500hp but only can harness 100 before the tires break free

Maybe if you never want to take a wide shot it makes sense, but when there are GOOD lenses and you bought a top of the line camera, why introduce such a weak link ?

RayZS wrote:

OP: Ignore all the hissy fits about IQ, barrel distortion, etc. It all comes down to the story you're trying to tell. If it's working for you, who cares. Stanley Kubrick, arguably one of the best photographers of ALL time coulda cared less about barrel distortion. And all the prim & proper photo nerds crucified him for his blown out interiors, only to see it become de riguer these days. Lots of hot air on this board.

 johnparas11zenfoliodotcom's gear list:johnparas11zenfoliodotcom's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Nikon D90 Nikon D300S Pentax Q Olympus PEN E-P3 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kaparra
Regular MemberPosts: 152
Like?
What about Raynox 0.5x on 14-140?
In reply to James Fisk, Jun 24, 2011

I have a Raynox DCR-500 0.5x converter. How would it work on 14-140? Anybody has this combination? I have tested it on some compacts and I find it pretty good. Some corner softness but with distortion correction it is less of a problem, and I still have very wide FOV.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
leafinsectman
Contributing MemberPosts: 763
Like?
Re: What about Raynox 0.5x on 14-140?
In reply to Kaparra, Jun 24, 2011

Kaparra wrote:

I have a Raynox DCR-500 0.5x converter. How would it work on 14-140? Anybody has this combination? I have tested it on some compacts and I find it pretty good. Some corner softness but with distortion correction it is less of a problem, and I still have very wide FOV.

I couldn't find any info on the DCR-500 but there's a DCR-5000. That has a mounting thread of 52mm whereas the 14-140mm has a 62mm filter ring. You'll need a step down filter but even then, it'll most likely vignette heavily.

Check out this thread where I attached a Canon WC-DC58B to my 14-140mm. At least that's one option although it's only 0.75x.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&message=38712859

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kaparra
Regular MemberPosts: 152
Like?
Re: What about Raynox 0.5x on 14-140?
In reply to leafinsectman, Jun 25, 2011

Yes, it's DCR-5000. I don't have the GH2, but could get one soon, and this converter could save me quite a few dollars. If I get 18mm equivalent FOV after proper cropping and distortion correction, I would be happy enough.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads