screw-on wide angle

[TS1]

Has anyone tried and experienced one of those screw-on wide angle converters? They are advertised for D-SLR lenses and apparently increase the angle considerably, for very little money, but the question of course is image quality, and whether the extra-weight buggers the autofocus motor.
thanks for replying
TS1

[OzzieTraveller]

G'day TS

Conventional wisdom - and you will have many respondents here offering it to you - is to buy a 'proper' lens
However, to answer your Q...

These lens attachments have been around for many years - mostly aimed at the fixed lens cameras [incl movie cameras] in an attempt to provide a bit more choice for those users. Over recent years I have tested 3-4 of these lenses

Most of today's fixed lens cameras are the superzoom variety, and several makers provide a tube gizmo to connect these lenses to the camera body to avoid placing any weight on the primary lens barrel - thus burning out the lens motors. However it is quite possible to attach these lenses to for example, an 18-55 as these lenses do not have the long 'trombone-extension' effect of the bigger zooms

Here's some image samples from recent lens tests

1- using a $50 [panagor] wide-angle attachment indoors > note the edge sharpness & image curvature
http://i44.tinypic.com/124ubz8.jpg

2- using a $200 [kodak] wide-angle lens attachment
http://i40.tinypic.com/i5deus.jpg

3- using a $50 "super-high-quality" brand tele attachment
http://i52.tinypic.com/160o51e.jpg

4- a comparison of the $50 lens above vs the zoomed image 'for real'
http://i56.tinypic.com/2zgf903.jpg

Hope this helps you decide which way to go ... :-)
Regards, Phil

[TS1]

Thanks Ozzie Traveller for opening my eyes; or should I say for giving me blurry eyes. I was thinking of getting one of those to expand my field of view for doing starry sky photos, but it is very obvious that you wouldn't be able to see any stars with those converters....too blurry.
Thanks for your help, I am cured of the idea.

[ameerat42]

But hang on a sec. That $200 Kodak attachment seems to have produced a nice, rectilinear and clear result.
I think your intention, Phil, was to illustrate the quality range. If so, and given TS1's initial idea of using such a thing on stars, that doesn't exclude the use of this one.
OF COURSE, it depends on what lens you put it over in the first place, BUT, the advantage of using a good one of these for stars is that you preserve the original aperture of the camera lens.

Ultimately, I'd say TS1, that if you can test a good one you might well do it.
Am.

[OzzieTraveller]

G'day Am + TS1

Am - you're quite right here > I was more interested in trying to help / prevent TS from wasting his quids on a piece of junk ... but the Kodak lens [or a canon or panasonic etc] lens costing $200-ish rather then $40-50 is a far better proposition

Here is a startrail pic using the Panny G2 + 14mm lens + 0,7x wide angle converter [ie-making it 10mm or thereabouts]
The image below is 300 camera images of 30 seconds, stacked using Startrails.de
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7228/7126076217_57e3a97aba_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/7126076217/)

Hope this helps a bit
Regards, Phil

[TS1]

Lovely shot Phil, and thanks for clarifying this. But with a Sigma or Tamron 10-10mm lens starting in $mid-500s I'd rather wait a bit more and treat myself to one of those.
And then I'll be trying some stacked star trails for sure :-))

[achee]

I've also tried a cheapie wide-angle screw-on converter... never again!