tetra316 0 #1 March 7, 2006 I've been checking out some different wide angle lenses to buy and the prices seem anywhere from $25 for a Kenko lense to $160 for a royal lense and up. So what are some brands to stay away form due to fogging or 'black corners'? What brands do you recommend? I tried a search but all I came up with was discussions on lenses sizes not brands. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #2 March 7, 2006 the Waycool Lenses have no vignetting, and AFAIK the Royal Lenses don't either.scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ScottMcC 0 #3 March 9, 2006 I had a Kenko .42 that vignetted pretty badly. I now have a Royal 0.5 that does not vignette at all. It was worth the money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeiber 0 #4 March 9, 2006 Chances are, you're going to get what you pay for. I bought my first lens at BestBuy for ~$30. I definitely got a $30 lens. My current lens is a Diamond .3x. It was pretty expensive, but the colors are brighter, picture is sharper, and there's no vignetting. If I had it to do all over again, I would have just saved my money for the Diamond.... Just my 2cents JeffShhh... you hear that sound? That's the sound of nobody caring! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mattjw916 2 #5 March 9, 2006 I've had very good success with the Sony .6x.NSCR-2376, SCR-15080 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tuck 0 #6 March 9, 2006 i have the royal .5 and its great. would recomend it to anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tetra316 0 #7 March 10, 2006 Thanks guys. I think I'll stay away from the Kenko. Anyone have experience with the Sony and royal lense, which one did you like better? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canuck 0 #8 March 10, 2006 QuoteThanks guys. I think I'll stay away from the Kenko. Anyone have experience with the Sony and royal lense, which one did you like better? I've had both, and much prefer the Sony. Frankly, I wasn't impressed with the Royal (I had the .3). There was no vignetting, but the image was definitely distorted around the edges. The Sony is crystal clear, and I really like being able to use the infinity focal setting (which you can't with any of the single element lenses). Canuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tetra316 0 #9 March 10, 2006 QuoteThe Sony is crystal clear, and I really like being able to use the infinity focal setting (which you can't with any of the single element lenses). Canuck What is the infinity focal setting? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Icon134 0 #10 March 10, 2006 QuoteWhat is the infinity focal setting? It is a soft setting w/in the sony's camera settings which allow you to set the focus at infinity. This is useful in skydiving because most of the time the subjects are far enough away (and there is enough light) that the depth of field can have everyone in focus from around 5 ft to infinity which is usually just fine for skydiving operations.Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zoter 0 #11 March 10, 2006 QuoteMy current lens is a Diamond .3x. It was pretty expensive, but the colors are brighter, picture is sharper, and there's no vignetting. ditto... Vignetted footage on mixed (vignetted and non vignetted) video when you are editing....just looks lame.... The single element lenses (eg diamond) are also much less of a snag hazard than the much larger kenko/sony lenses. I have seen a few of the larger lenses (kenko and sony ) being snagged /riser striked and damaging the attachment to the camera body Not seen/heard of that on a low profile lens no contest really... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Peej 0 #12 March 10, 2006 Can someone explain what you guys mean by vignetting? I'm not up to speed with my camera terms Advertisio Rodriguez / Sky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbla4024 0 #13 March 10, 2006 Vignetting = dark corners of picture Fido Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #14 March 10, 2006 Quote Can someone explain what you guys mean by vignetting? I'm not up to speed with my camera terms black corners/round on the picture. Can be cool.. sometimes. Not always.scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #15 March 10, 2006 Quote I really like being able to use the infinity focal setting (which you can't with any of the single element lenses).Yes you can, you can't zoom much though. But my camera is ALWAYS on infinty, whichever lens I am using.scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Peej 0 #16 March 10, 2006 Ah, thanks Fido and Fish! Haven't experienced this with my Kenko yet. And i'm the same as you Fish, my camera is ALWAYS zoomed all the way out and on infinity. Advertisio Rodriguez / Sky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canuck 0 #17 March 10, 2006 QuoteQuote I really like being able to use the infinity focal setting (which you can't with any of the single element lenses).Yes you can, you can't zoom much though. But my camera is ALWAYS on infinty, whichever lens I am using. Looked like absolute shit when I tried it with my .3 lens - I would have had to been really drunk to think the image was in focus. You will also see that every manufacturer of single element lenses advises NOT to use the infinity setting. Zoter - No argument that they are as close to snag proof as any lens comes. Mind you, I think my ringsight, still camera, etc. pose more of a threat than any lens. Canuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zoter 0 #18 March 10, 2006 QuoteZoter - No argument that they are as close to snag proof as any lens comes. Mind you, I think my ringsight, still camera, etc. pose more of a threat than any lens. Canuck I meant in terms of dealing with riser strikes and snags that dont cause any other problems......as said I have seen damage to the camera by the risers or something just catching the big lense and causing it to damage its attachment point on the cam........in one case that was suspected as the cause for taking the camera off an unprotected side mount helmet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NSEMN8R 0 #19 March 12, 2006 QuoteI think I'll stay away from the Kenko. I think it just depends on how wide you want to go. It's when you want to go really wide and not have black corners that you have to spend some money. I use a waycool .25 that's really nice, but it cost a couple hundred dollars. For less wide lenses the cheaper ones seem to work fine for me. I use a kenko .5 for tandem videos and haven't had any problems. It's not low profile, but it cost about 1/10th of what the waycool lens did. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bowen 0 #20 March 15, 2006 I would go with waycool. I have flown both the royal and the way cool lenses and the way cool is better in my opinion. you can use the filter to protect the lense from scratches. once the filter is bad throw it out and buy a new one. -Bowen __________________________________________________Retired Tunnel Instructor, Sky/Tunnel Coach Former dealer for 2k Composites, Skysystems, Alti-2, Wings Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carpediem 0 #21 March 17, 2006 My Sony .6x works great with my TRV33. I just wish it was alum tho. I'm waiting for a bump at the door to do it in Those who do, can't explain. Those who don't, can't understand. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tetra316 0 #22 March 18, 2006 QuoteMy Sony .6x works great with my TRV33. So what is a cheaper website to buy the sony lense off of? What's the price? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #23 March 18, 2006 check ebay, seen some there. buy now $? bhphotovideo.com mo $$ sony.com even mo $$$? ~you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tetra316 0 #24 March 18, 2006 Quotecheck ebay, seen some there. buy now $? bhphotovideo.com mo $$ sony.com even mo $$$? ~ Ok, am I missing something, the sony .6 lense is $32 on ebay and $50 on the sony site. The royal is $159 and waycool about $140. Why is the sony so much cheaper than the royal lenses? Are the royal and waycool really that much better? I would have thought the sony ones to be more expensive. Or am I just paying more cuz their 'skydiving specific'? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NSEMN8R 0 #25 March 18, 2006 I won't get another Sony lens. I had one before and it was so heavy that the front end of my trv11 fell apart after 1 season with it. The Sony lens I had was quite a bit heavier than the kenko I use now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites