Cyrus79 0 #1 June 5, 2009 My Optica has just arrived! Although I realize this isn't the best way to compare them, here's a "quick" comparison of photos taken from the same position with these three lenses...I'm surprised at how close the Royal and the Optica are width wise. These were taken with my CX-100 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #2 June 5, 2009 Look at that chromatic shift and distortion on the Optica and Royal lenses!Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
excel485 0 #3 June 5, 2009 I have noticed that the raynox 3032 isnt very wide at all on the cx100. Think I may go with the Baby Death or try the century .55 Just not happy with the narrow field in the raynox, but do like the quality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #4 June 5, 2009 I knew there was a reason I liked my Raynox! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bomb420 1 #5 June 5, 2009 A comparison between the Raynox .3 and the Century .5 would be interesting. I would bet the .5 is wider. How do you have the Raynox setup? Do you have the 30-37mm step-up ring and then the 37mm-37mm adapter ring or just the 30-37mm? Seems really narrow to me. -TrunkHYPOXIC Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shogo 0 #6 June 6, 2009 I had both at one time, because I thought the same. Raynox 3030 is wider than century 0.5 by quite a bit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
icevideot 0 #7 June 9, 2009 Thanks for posting these. I will be able to make a more informed decision now. This confirms that my choice of the Raynox 3032 was a good choice for working jumps. As for something wider for inside video, I think the Opteka is quite a bit sharper around the edges than the Royal. Thankfully, it would be less annoying when the distortion is over clouds or blue sky. I don't think I could stand it for ground footage. What do you like best?"... this ain't a Nerf world." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cyrus79 0 #8 June 9, 2009 I like the Raynox best as far as quality...that said, the Optica is my choice lens for inside freefly jumps. It is, like you said, sharper than the Royal 0.2, and the price is right. >> "How do you have the Raynox setup? Do you have the 30-37mm step-up ring and then the 37mm-37mm adapter ring or just the 30-37mm?" << I have the Raynox setup using only the 30mm to 37mm. Here's a couple frame grabs from each lens in the air... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jiggs 0 #9 June 10, 2009 I have a Raynox 3032 and it takes some amazing quality footage - but I need something wider still. I guess the Optica (0.3) might be the go. Any other suggestions? Or the best place to order one? Cheers!"Don't blame malice for what stupidity can explain." "In our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart and in our despair, against our will comes wisdom" - Aeschylus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunnelfly 0 #10 June 10, 2009 I got mine from here. But since their overseas shipping rates are ridiculous, I got it sent to a friends US address and he brought it over. I like the wide angle of the lens, but its bloody heavy... No.1 reason NOT to be an astronaut: ...You can't drink beer at zero gravity... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Acoisa 0 #11 June 10, 2009 Hi could you please post the diameter of the Optica .3.. I want to sidemount the cx 100 with on a tonfly helmet with their box and am wondering if I can even do that with this setup... Thanks a lot, Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cyrus79 0 #12 June 10, 2009 QuoteHi could you please post the diameter of the Optica .3.. The Optica is exactly 3" in diameter and ~ 1" thick. ...do I find it heavy? not really, it's about the same weight as the Raynox 0.3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
excel485 0 #13 June 10, 2009 I just ordered one from 47th street photo. Cant wait to get it and try it out. The Raynox isnt wide enough for the closeup freefly shots I want on video.Will let you know how I iike it when I jump it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wharewaka 0 #14 June 12, 2009 Opteka Platinum Series 37mm 0.3X HD Ultra Fisheye Lens VS Century Optics .3x Ultra Fisheye Adapter for Digital Video Cameras with 37mm Lens Front Diameter Trying to find a comparison between these two lenses? Is the century really 3 times better, like the price indicates? Talking results on a modern hd tv screen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
velocityphoto 0 #15 June 12, 2009 Probably not a good idea to side mount it. If you did, plan on loosing it and breaking your video camera threads in the process. Unless of course the box covers the lens too. A friend will bail you out of jail , a REAL friend will be sitting next to you in the cell slapping your hand saying "DUDE THAT WAS AWSUM " ................ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frost 1 #16 June 12, 2009 I have both Raynox HD3030 and Royal .3 and .5. While for quality HD footage nothing really compares to the Raynox HD, I by far prefer Royal lens for it's size and weight on every day jumps. Since the quality of the Optica is only marginally better in the corners, i think i will stay with the low profile Royal, but it would still be interesting to see a pic of the Optica mounted to the CX100 for the lens dimensions relative to the camera. Thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cyrus79 0 #17 June 12, 2009 Here's what the Optica lens looks like on the CX-100... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frost 1 #18 June 13, 2009 Thank you!! Yeah, as i suspected it is definitely considerably larger the low profile Royal... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marc84 0 #19 September 22, 2009 i like the look of the Optica .3... is it as wide as the royal .2? i'm using a Liquid 3 x 0.29 Wide angle lens... i would like to have a lens that is a little wider than the liquid 3... And i'm getting Vignetting if i shoot in 16:9... does the royal or the Optica Vegnette in 16:9? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cyrus79 0 #20 September 22, 2009 The Optica 0.3 is "almost" as wide as the Royal 0.2, but not quite... I have no vignetting (black corners) whatsoever using these lens's with my CX-100, however, this can vary from camera to camera or thread size differences... I love the Optica...I use it for freefly jumps, even tandem video jumps...just need to zoom in 3 notches and good to go. IMO, it's a must have lens if shooting HD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joaocorreia 0 #21 December 27, 2009 Hello, Do you think the "not so wider" view on the Raynox might be the adapter rings fault ? If you notice the adapter ring is going to alter the distance to the sensor so there must be implications on the image. Joao Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
icevideot 0 #22 December 27, 2009 When I was researching this I read from a couple of sources that I can't remember now that the adapter ring makes the view a little wider. I can't attest to this personally because I have not tried to use a ring just as a spacer to see what changed. Maybe someone else knows more firsthand."... this ain't a Nerf world." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blink 1 #23 December 28, 2009 Yes, a spacer can make a big difference. Here is a link that shows a comparison of two lenses and one with a spacer. http://forums.skateperception.com/index.php?showtopic=226801 There are many other comparisons on those forums as well, but keep in mind their goal is usually extreme fisheye, and vignetting not as important. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
