On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:13:07 -0500, "TJCoyote" wrote:

>After lurking on this newsgroup and perusing many websites, I've finally
>decided that Sony's VX2000 may be the right camcorder for me.
>
>Unfortunately, the VX2000's minimum focal length is equivalent to 45mm on a
>35mm still camera, according to Century Optics
>(http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/video/digital/diglenschart.html#pd150
>). That's a bit too close for comfort, I'd like to have at least a 35mm on
>its wide angle setting.
>
>A wide angle adapter is one possibility. From what I've read, all
>wide-angle adapters and converters add barrel distortion, and more
>importantly, it isn't possible to add screw-on filters to them without
>causing vignetting.

The Raynox .66X-58 adds no distortion of its own.
It also has a front thread, but I do not recommend
adding a filter here (possibly better at the rear...)
since the front element is flat, as I recall [can
cause reflection problems between the parallel flat
surfaces...]). I use a screw-in lens shade with
a front plate added with a rectangle cut in it - this
offers both protection and good shading (needed by this
converter...). As for barrel distortion, it actually has
some advantages, I think (see:
http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/perspective-correction.htm
and:
http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/articles.html#perspective
for some of my rantings on the subject...;-)

>I greatly prefer to put a UV filter on all my lenses to
>protect them, and also like to have the option to add an additional filter
>on top of that (polarizer, softening filter, etc.) Century sells a matte
>box which may be one way to solve the problem but a.) this solution won't
>protect the lens or wide angle adapter, and b.) 4x4 drop in filters are
>rather expensive. Any ideas?
>
>I may buy a 16:9 anamorphic adapter a year or so from now-- maybe sooner.
>According to Centuruy, the anamorphic adapter results in a 35mm focal length
>on its wide-angle setting. Again, that's a wide-angle focal length I can
>live with. Unfortunately, the anamorphic adapter has all of the same issues
>that a wide-angle adapter has. I can't use screw-on filters without
>vignetting, and without a screw-on filter, how do I protect the lens? I'd
>also have to use a lens hood or matte box to avoid lens flare, and use 4x4
>drop in filters if I want to use a filter.
>
>How do others deal with situation? Skip the UV protector filter? (good
>wide angle converters and anamorphic converters aren't cheap!) If my
>reasoning is flawed, please advise! Thanks!

Actually, good WA converters, at least, are kinda cheap:
the Raynox is about $96, shipped, from www.edmamarketing.com
and the Canon WD-58 is about $180 from www.bhphotovideo.com.