Have just a few pictures on my site published with the intent of the lens HD-5000 PRO on one of Raynox Canon HV20 were created. The report is
Antwort von Blackeagle123:
as I have understood you, you have adapter ring (s) used? How big and how many have you used? I think that it is vignetting. When you use of adapter rings, I would none 0.5 WW take it, I think 0.7 would not have been a problem since ... Depends, of course, synonymous of self from Wide Angle.
With the blurring that you describe, I would be very unhappy. In the pictures, it is hardly on. Also, the margins are pretty much bent.
Overall, I would part with s.einer Camera correct thread test, or buy a new WW ... How much do you have for the WW-Adapters paid? Which thread is it suitable?
Many greetings, Constantin
Antwort von Genevare:
That with the adapter ring is indeed described in the text. I have extra one in China ordered (for 99 cents plus postage), the rear of the lens as close as possible s.das HV20 Lens brings - precisely in order to avoid vignetting. Of the Raynox adapter supplied on 43mm would be inappropriate. I think part of the Raynox marketed for 37 to 46mm.
I paid about $ 100 in the U.S. - was a few years ago. I had him synonymous times s.der SonyHC-1 is used, there were synonymous in fullscreen vignetting visible. On television, they were then not to see (thanks to overscan).
The edges are actually curved, but the factor of 0.5 for something in the nature of things. Only very expensive WW-Lenses for professional cameras lead to low distortion.
I find synonymous, that the blurred - especially in the middle - in the limits. For the occasional use of the adapter is capable of something you have just reinzoomen order to eliminate the vignetting. Above all, it is so easy that it takes synonymous. ;-)