63 replies to this topic

[Allen]

(please excuse the mess, just moved and had a party. and yes i know the calendar is jan 09, it's a peter lik, i like the pictures too much to toss it)
shot at f8 i think. focus is on the microwave.



full-size of the above image:
http://hostthenpost.org/uploads/8a2ae26b09f90b8eb2e37d41436a5769.jpg
http://hostthenpost.org/uploads/9717ce9e71347d191f18a3d5e82c39cc.jpg

it looks like there is a loss of sharpness when you look at the calendar area. i'll try to get some better shots for testing purposes today or tomorrow.

[Arjay]

Actually, I think the IQ of the picture with installed WA converter is pretty good. There is some chromatic aberration, but I believe this is less than what I remembered having with the WC-E68 installed on my Coolpix 5000. And the other problem that was to be expected - barrel distortion - appears to be rather moderate as well.

As far as I can remember, this combination is the best I have seen yet of all the WA converters that have been discussed in this forum to date. It seems you have a winner here.

BTW, how do you plan to protect the bulging converter front lens? I remember that this lens is rather exposed and prone to get knocked into things.

[Allen]

thanks for your input. i don't have a good eye for all the things you pointed out. i am definitely very happy with it. especially for under $25

no way really to protect while in use. when put away, the provided cap should do it's job nicely

[jknights]

Some but low barrel distortion which is a major plus point.
Nikon obviously produce high quality optics so this is no huge surprise.
I think it may have a little less distortion than my Raynox DCR-720 wide angle add-on.

Adding a secondary lens on the front of another is always a compromise. I think this is why people were so vociferous about the X100 having a fixed lens. It was largely disappointment that the camera didnt allow for different lenses.

I wish I could find a similar suitable x2 or x3 converter that didnt vignette. I am on my third TC (Neewer 2x optic) add-on as the first two units, both x3 converters, were just useless as they vignetted so badly.

[LincolnLogs]

(please excuse the mess, just moved and had a party. and yes i know the calendar is jan 09, it's a peter lik, i like the pictures too much to toss it)
shot at f8 i think. focus is on the microwave.



full-size of the above image:
http://hostthenpost.org/uploads/8a2ae26b09f90b8eb2e37d41436a5769.jpg
http://hostthenpost.org/uploads/9717ce9e71347d191f18a3d5e82c39cc.jpg

it looks like there is a loss of sharpness when you look at the calendar area. i'll try to get some better shots for testing purposes today or tomorrow.

Allan,

What is the effective angle of view as compared to 35mm film cameras? 24mm? 28mm?,

Linc

[flysurfer]

Allan,

What is the effective angle of view as compared to 35mm film cameras? 24mm? 28mm?,

Linc

35 x 0.68 = 23.8

[JBA]

Hi Allen ( that's my surname too. . )

I'm impressed by the corner sharpness of your test shots. I just got a secondhand Minolta ACW 100, and it is blurry once you get in to the extreme corners and a bit fuzzy leading up to the corners. It's A good lens, and is usable but not as good as your Nikon seems to be. Trouble is the Nikon lens in the UK seems to be extortionate. Certainly not 'a few dollars'. I can get one from the States a lot cheaper but it may take two weeks to arrive.
Trouble is, I am now thinking that really i should work with what i have and get used to the X100 lens as it is, before i try to enhance it. We'll see. If i find a cheap Nikon I'll go for it i think.
cheers,
Jon

[cyberevo]

May I ask what is the difference between Nikon WC-E67 and WC-E68?

[Arjay]

The WC-E68 is the older model - it was designed for the Coolpix 5000, a camera that appeared on the market in 2003 (correct me if I didn't get the year right). Anyway, the WC-E68 has been out of production for several years.

The WC-E67 seems to be dedicated for the new Nikon P5000.

The WC-E68 features a male 46mm thread. I don't know the size of the WC-E67's mounting thread. I don't know if both converters have the same optical formula.

[switn]

I have a PANASONIC dmw-lwa 52 for sale. I just simply don't use it on my x100.
If you are interested: [email protected] I'm from Belgium.

This nikon looks pretty good to. As long as you pay enough, you will get quality.

[JBA]

Well, I just got a WC-E68 ordered from Japan. Not too much money as it was second hand. I look forward to seeing how good it is. I ordered a 49 to 46mm step down adaptor ring too.
cheers,
Jon

[JBA]

OK, talking to myself here as the subject of wide converters has slipped off the general agenda somewhat it seems. . . but. . . I find the Nikon to be better than the Minolta and probably as good as it's going to get. It is a touch fuzzy at the extreme edges, but definitely usable (AF works through it). And it is a lot smaller in diameter. I shall sell the Minolta. Lens caps will be a problem for the nikon due to the domed glass. i shall have to find some sort of flexible lens hood cover type thing. 67mm is a bit big for the ones I've seen though. Any advice?
So from what I've read here and elsewhere, avoid the cheapo converters, the raynox has fuzzy edges, the minolta does too, but the nikon is good. (needs a 49 to 46mm step down ring)
cheers,
Jon

[BigTam]

Well, I just got a WC-E68 ordered from Japan. Not too much money as it was second hand. I look forward to seeing how good it is. I ordered a 49 to 46mm step down adaptor ring too.
cheers,
Jon

Aha! So you were the one who bought it while I was dithering :-)

I think I'll keep a watch on the E68. Please let us know how you get along with it.

[jknights]

OK, talking to myself here as the subject of wide converters has slipped off the general agenda somewhat it seems. . . but. . . I find the Nikon to be better than the Minolta and probably as good as it's going to get. It is a touch fuzzy at the extreme edges, but definitely usable (AF works through it). And it is a lot smaller in diameter. I shall sell the Minolta. Lens caps will be a problem for the nikon due to the domed glass. i shall have to find some sort of flexible lens hood cover type thing. 67mm is a bit big for the ones I've seen though. Any advice?
So from what I've read here and elsewhere, avoid the cheapo converters, the raynox has fuzzy edges, the minolta does too, but the nikon is good. (needs a 49 to 46mm step down ring)
cheers,
Jon

I think you beat me to the unit on ebay :-)
I was going to buy it but lost out in the final bidding.
Glad that you are liking the unit. The Raynox that I currently have is not as good.

[JBA]

Mine was a buy it now from a guy in Japan. i was watching a few in the last week or two before that one came up. Funny how we are all potential competitors on ebay!

I shall post a pic or two once i have tried it out a bit more thoroughly at different f stops etc etc. So far I have some test shots of the garden and a hedge, to test the edge detail etc. Not very exciting ;-)
cheers,
Jon

[Allen]

shot this using the converter last night. shot in full manual with me holding down the shutter in bulb setting since i just discovered my sticky blades. off to fuji...

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

[Mark Hilliard]

What is the filter thread size on the back of the WC-E68? Hopefull 49mm so that a step up ring is not needed!

[Bluenose]

What is the filter thread size on the back of the WC-E68? Hopefull 49mm so that a step up ring is not needed!

46mm. So a 49mm to 46mm step down ring should work.

Cheers,

Bill

[Mark Hilliard]

Thanks Bill, I ordered the ring from Amazon and the wa adapter from ebay.

[jknights]

Has anyone tried the WC-E67 version ?
From the specifications I cant see any reason why it shouldnt work as well.

[jknights]

Well since I have a P5000 I thought I would get a WC-E67. This would allow me to use on P5000 and also test on the X100.
I was very lucky to find one on eBay and got it for a reasonable price. I should have the lens in a week or so.
If this works on the X100 and is better quality than my Raynox then I will have a 24mm (film equivalent lens on the X100).

[mdwsta4]

Been debating about picking one of these up for when I travel. 35mm is simply too long for the inside of cathedrals and certain buildings.

[litphotography_01]

The WC-E68 is the older model - it was designed for the Coolpix 5000, a camera that appeared on the market in 2003 (correct me if I didn't get the year right). Anyway, the WC-E68 has been out of production for several years.

The WC-E67 seems to be dedicated for the new Nikon P5000.

The WC-E68 features a male 46mm thread. I don't know the size of the WC-E67's mounting thread. I don't know if both converters have the same optical formula.

Mr. Arjay can I ask what camera did you used is it Nikon? what model? Can you tell me what camera is most popular now?

[Arjay]

In don't understand your question. I use cameras for a purpose, not because they're in fashion.

[jknights]

I received my Nikon WCE-67 with EC20 adapter so it will fit perfectly on my Nikon P5000.
However even better it screws directly into the adapter that I have on the front of my camera that acts as a 'hood' for the X100. This hood/adapter is a 49mm/28mm step down ring in black.



So to use the wideangle I just screw it into the front of my 'hood'.
The quality of the lens is better than the Raynox and it is also smaller so it is a win/win/win for me.

[hunz]

jknights, could you post some pics of your X100 with Nikon WCE-67 set-up, what step down ring does one need. And could you post photos with this? thanks!

[jknights]

jknights, could you post some pics of your X100 with Nikon WCE-67 set-up, what step down ring does one need. And could you post photos with this? thanks!

It needs a step down ring so you can fit the 28mm thread of the WCE-67.
Here are some images of my setup.



Comparison of size of Nikon and Raynox wideangle converters.



Also some example shots.
I have tried to centre the images on the fir tree tip in the near centre of all three images.
Without converter.



With converter and skylight filter as in setup above.
Image with the Nikon wideangle converter attached looks like there is a vignette in the top corners.
THIS IS A SLIGHT VIGNETTE caused by the added extension of the skylight filter between the lens attachment and the lens.




If this filter is removed then you get NO vignette at all. :-)

[hunz]

Thanks for this mate The image without filter/vignette looks pretty good. Do you find you have to use high f-stops eg. f8-f16 to get more definition to the edges or do you find that it does not matter?

How is the corner sharpness generally with this lens? -- I guess the question is which Nikon WC has better performance, the WC-E68 or E67, has anyone compared both?

What is the front diameter of the lens?

Lastly, in regards to the step down ring you got, where did you buy it from, ebay? -- just wondering if the depth of the ring (ie spacing between lenses due to adapter ring) can have an effect on focusing and performance?

[hunz]

shot this using the converter last night. shot in full manual with me holding down the shutter in bulb setting since i just discovered my sticky blades. off to fuji...


http://www.flickr.com/photos/allen2oo3/6312598742/in/photostream/lightbox/

Do you find you have to stop down to get sharpness in the corners with your E68? and what is the front diameter of the lens?

[videogamemaker]

It needs a step down ring so you can fit the 28mm thread of the WCE-67.
Here are some images of my setup.

Maybe you have already answered, but how do you find the quality of this 2x converter? do you have any samples using it at f/2?