There are frame-grabs shot with two Century WA converters
on the Canon XL-1 standard zoom lens in the camcorder
reviews on my web site - the results were not very good...
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm
And, just before it became not very relevant, Kenko did
produce a pretty good .5X zoom-through for the VX-1000
(mentioned in the VX-1000 review...). Lately I have been
trying out the Raynox 58mm .66X, which is quite good on
several camcorders (mostly ones smaller than 58mm
thread-mount, though).

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:14:07 -0400, Charlie Steiner wrote:
>
>there is no question that the Century is way superior to the others. the
>better the camera, the better you can see the difference, which is very
>clear when the lens is wide open (in low light). I have a Kenko and since I
>got a Century I never use the cheaper one -- yes, in this case you get what
>you pay for.
>
>and, by the way, I believe there is no good .5 zoom-thru, at any price, even
>the $2000 ones for broadcast lenses.

>Neuman - Ruether wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 07 Jul 2001 22:55:30 GMT, "brian a. henderson"
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I hear a lot of people going for the Century Optics zoom through WA for
>> >the JVC GY-DV500. Is there a cheaper alternative? Raynox or Kenko
>> >perhaps? Or, as usual, do you just get what you pay for?
>>
>> With this, it is mostly a matter of mounting-diameter
>> and available converters to fit - otherwise, *selected*
>> Raynox and Kenko converters are generally at least as
>> good as the far more expensive Century (which not only
>> offers large-diameter converters, but often ones that
>> fit specific front bayonets). Even 58mm converters are
>> not common yet (still looking for a good zoom-through
>> 58mm .5X...).