Can anyone tell me about Wide Angle Lens converters?

[courtney_goble]

Just wondering how the wide angle lens converters that you attach to the end of

a regular kit lens works. I'd be using it with my XTi.

 

Thanks!

[j_smith6]

It's just a group of lenses which increase field of view, cause big distortion and chromatic aberrations.

[ralph_jensen]

I can only speak to experience with screwing them on to point-and-shoot cameras, and the result there is, to put it charitably, disappointing. The photos are noticeably softer (especially away from the center), and the barrel distortion (bowing outward) was excessive, almost fisheye-like, in the models I've used. A good novelty item, but if the photo will be enlarged more than 4x6 the degradation in image quality is immediately apparent.

 

That said, I suppose that if they're cheap enough, they're fun to play with. But they deliver nothing like the quality you'll get even from the 18-55 kit lens on its own.

 

By the way, I've used three different brands of converters - almost all of them on eBay now say "Higher resolution than the other brands" - and all three were equally lacking.

[rainer_t]

These converters are a waste of money. If you buy one, you'll use it a few times and you'll likely be disappointed by the results, so that the converter is rarely used (if ever) from then on.

 

If you really need and want wider than 18mm, there are the ultrawides for crop 1.6 cameras ... namely ...

 

... Canon EFS 10-22

 

... Sigma 10-20 DC

 

... Tokina 12-24 DX

 

... Tamron 11-18 Dii

 

but none of them is exactly a bargain lens.

[JDMvW]

With adapters on the front of your lens, you get pretty much what you pay for. They cost a fraction of what you pay for the lenses Rainer recommends and you get a fraction of the utility.

 

That having been said, I have found a little Samigon/Kenko/Spiratone type 0.15X fisheye attachement to be actually useful, and I'd say that the picture quality is no worse than a Spiratone 7mm lens I briefly had in my hands. I just don't need a fisheye perspective very often (and I have a 20-20mm Sigma zoom) so when I need curved, 180 degree coverage, the Samigon 0.15X fits nicely onto my 35mm f/2 Canon prime.

[chrisjb]

Fujiama x.45 WA made japan + kit 18 55 + 20d...Nuff said

[bobatkins]

They are fine (or at least OK) on video cameras where you don't need (or have) a great deal of resolution. That's what they were originally designed for.

 

On 35mm camera lenses, they generally suck unless you're after a "soft distorted washed-out" look.

[chrisjb]

100% center. Say no more

[marknagel]

I bought one out of curiosity, It sucked. I tried it on a few lenses, but on my 20D with the 17-85mm, it had to be around 28mm to get rid of the solid circular vignette in the photo. At 28mm + the WA adapter, it was pretty close to the 17mm alone, but with TERRIBLE sharpness and bad CA. So really there was NO wide angle benefit.

 

Here's a sample at 24mm:

http://www.nagelhome.com/phototest/wa.jpg

 

M

[tapani]

<p>They're not much use for anything serious, but can be fun.</p>

<p>

I bought a cheap one ten years ago to get some fisheye-experience,

and did get some fun pictures with it and a 28mm lens (on film body),

<a href="http://tapani.tarvainen.info/photo/seasia1997/pictures/spore26b.html">

like this one</a>.

It's (poor) quality is more apparent in

<a href="http://tapani.tarvainen.info/photo/seasia1997/pictures/spore01b.html">

this picture</a>.

</p>

<p>I haven't used it with the kit lens, though, but I do have

one somewhere, I could try how it works. What kind of subjects

were you planning to use it for?

</p>

[gregor_pabst]

I have recently tested a Hyundai CL-58W05X against a Canon EF 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM II and an EF 20-35/3.5-4.5 USM on a 350D. I just can acknowledge, what Mark wrote. The test pictures and some notes can be seen here: http://eos.serveblog.net/fotos/superwide/superwide.htm