wide angle conversion lens on Mamiya 645…not so wide.

[rippo]

<p>Bought a cheap wide angle conversion lens off ebay for my Mamia 645AF, just to see what it would do. $12 and free shipping, how could I go wrong? I figured image quality would suffer at the edges, but I wasn't planning on using it for anything too critical. Conversion lens was advertised as a .45x lens.</p>

<p>On my 80mm lens, that ought to convert it to a 36mm lens…very wide for MF. (46mm to 21mm in 35mm equivalent, if I'm doing my math properly). However it is nowhere near that wide! Looks more like a very gentle 60mm or thereabouts.<br>

This lens is designed for dSLRs and video cameras. Is there something about using it on a longer lens (speaking in absolute terms) that is robbing me of my additional wide-ness? Or is it just BS about the focal length conversion? Thanks.</p>

[ingemar_lampa1]

<p>There may be a reason why a Carl Zeiss (or any other quality glass) 40mm M/F wide angle lens costs more than $12.</p>

<p>Just my 2 cents worth.</p>

<p>(was I just trolled??? :)</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>You get what you pay for</p>

[rippo]

<p>Wasn't expecting good image quality for $12. Just puzzled why it didn't look like .45x. Can anyone answer my question?</p>

[tim_bosley1]

<blockquote>

<p>Wasn't expecting good image quality for $12. Just puzzled why it didn't look like .45x</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Err.... maybe because it was $12 ;)</p>

<p> </p>

[bueh]

<p>It must be your converter. I ended up with of of these "Laser Deluxe Super Wide Macro 0.45XXX AF" (I'm not making this up!) add-ons and when I put it on the 90mm lens of my Great Wall SLR the field-of-view indeed doubles. Image quality is extremely poor with almost no real sharpness. Adds lots of flare, though.</p>

[rippo]

<p>Thank you Bueh, for a substantive answer! That's exactly what I needed to hear. I was concerned I was misinterpreting the whole .45x thing, or that it only applied to certain focal lengths etc (although why that would be, I don't know). I wasn't expected a good image, just a wide one. I'll have to look for your Laser Deluxe! ;)</p>

[bueh]

<p>Don't waste your money, Matt! The pictures are just bad -- not good-bad, but really poor with no quality. Contrast is very poor and chromatic aberration is very high. Only a spot in the center shows actual sharpness, the rest is just distorted.</p>

<p>However, on a real wide angle lens it may produce some fun photos... Shot with an EOS 5D, EF 24mm f/2.8 and Speedlite 430EX -- the wide converter was hand-held against the lens.</p><div></div>

[rippo]

<p>I dunno, I think that's a pretty cool image! But I have to start weighing a $50-70 purchase (which I think the nicer ones are) as compared to a $250-300 purchase for the real thing, and it starts to make less sense.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>If you're into panoramas you can pick up an anamorphic converter reasonably cheaply. This would convert a 50mm standard on 135 into 28mm (or 80mm into 45mm), but only in the horizontal axis. The quality is much better than with cheapo add-on lenses, but the weight and size is far greater. Don't expect the exact same results as a true wideangle lens either - the results are much more like a stitched pano or swing-lens camera.</p>

<p>I have an Iscorama converter that was fun to play with before stitching software got so easy to use. You can either scan the film and stretch it digitally or use the converter lens on your enlarger.</p>