skydork 0 #1 June 23, 2008 I need a new lens for my HC-90 for tandems? I can't keep the moisture out of my Sony 0.6X anymore. Royal Stelth 0.5x Or, Liquid 5 Or Something else. I have$200.00 to spend on it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #2 June 23, 2008 I think you'll find that they're basically the same. Check what shipping costs on the cookie if you're buying direct from them. I know when I was looking for a lens, a WayCool was going to be $40 for shipping. You can probably put a filter on the cookie and not on the royal (at least not easily), but I wouldn't recommend that anyway so to me that doesn't matter. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #3 June 23, 2008 Cookie, and contrary to what Dave said, a filer cost $20-$40 to replace if scratched, the lens will cost considerably more. The lens quality will be pretty much the same but, I wont buy a Royal Lens, I dont like the way they do businessYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
saxboy 0 #4 June 23, 2008 The Way cool "red eye" works for me perfect. A friend of mine bought a cookie 0.3 and it has distortion on the image and black corners with the filter on his sony cx7.The red eye is just perfect.With, or without filter has perfect image and it has lower profile than the cookie.Check it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 2 #5 June 23, 2008 Do you have the black sony .6? If so, it is very wide, wider than say a hama .45 so buying a .5 may not be what you want, I'd try to borrow one first and compare. Not sure about the silver version of the sony .6 but may be similar. Do you really need a single element lens? For topmount i'd buy a raynox .5 or .3 HD lens right now, as those are very good lenses, they aren't very expensive, they can be used on a future HD camera and they can be zoomed (so the .3 is probably perfect for you zoomed in a bit). For sidemount I'd go with a single element lens. ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #6 June 23, 2008 I had a filter on my waycool for a long time. It came on the lens (bought it used) and I couldn't get it off. I eventually got a little speck of dirt or something between the lens and the filter. Showed up in every video and drove me nuts. I finally gave it to a machinist to try to get it off. I suggested making a threaded hole in a piece of metal that it would screw into so that he could really get a good tug on the filter (camera has plastic threads so i didn't want to pull too hard). But anyway, he ended up cutting it off. So I started jumping without the filter. What a difference! Video looks so much better, especially when facing the sun (on exit for example). I used to use a cheap canon filter on my still camera. I discovered that it was causing a lot of issues too. I replaced that one with a more expensive coated filter and the problem was solved. I like the idea of a clear filter for protection, but not at the expense of picture quality. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #7 June 23, 2008 Quote I used to use a cheap canon filter on my still camera. I discovered that it was causing a lot of issues too. I replaced that one with a more expensive coated filter and the problem was solved. I like the idea of a clear filter for protection, but not at the expense of picture quality. DaveThe waycool filters are a completely different fittment to the Cookie ones. The Cookie ones are screw on just like standard SLR lens filters. using a quality UV filter will not impair the video qualityYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #8 June 23, 2008 Well, generally adding glass in front of a lens will impair the video quality to some extent. Is the cookie filter a "quality UV filter?" Is it coated to reduce internal reflections? Do you know for a fact that the cookie filter is higher quality than the waycool filter? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydork 0 #9 June 23, 2008 Would like a single element lens to keep this from happening again. Our DZ is only 4 miles from lake Ontario so we have a lot of moisture. Have the silver Sony .6X now. Bought this when we had a Otter. Now down to Cessna so the exit is a little tighter. This lens is for a Sony DCR-HC90. I have a Royal .3x for my Sony PC-109 side mount I use for coach jumps. Was just wondering if there was anything I was missing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #10 June 23, 2008 QuoteWell, generally adding glass in front of a lens will impair the video quality to some extent. Is the cookie filter a "quality UV filter?" Is it coated to reduce internal reflections? Do you know for a fact that the cookie filter is higher quality than the waycool filter? Dave you are getting way of base here dave. I never made mention of the quality of either mfgrs filters. the cookie filter ring will accept standard filters like HOYA. The waycool will not as they are a competely different fitting system. btw in general the more elements in a lens the more possibility for internal reflection, not just in front of the prime lens. but any good quality lens (including filter lenes) will be "anti-reflex" coated.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
