My B&H Cart - What do you think? ;)

[Ted]

That would also work. The Cavision mounts to the outside of the Raynox lens which has a diameter of 77mm. The General Brand screw-in fits into the filter threads which are 72mm. My only concern with the General would be the possibility of vignetting (where the rim of the lens hood casts a shadow on the outside of the image)... I don't know if it would be a problem, but you could call B&H and ask them. They're very good about testing equipment for customers over the phone. They'll mount up all the gear you're looking at and tell you if there's a problem.

Thanks, Jack... are round hoods more prone to vignette, rather than the rectangular ones (Cavision)?

Also, if the General is a screw-in, I'm guessing that I couldn't also add a UV filter...(only one screw-in per lens?)

[jackfalbey]

Vignetting has to do with the field of view of the lens at its widest setting. If it's wide enough, it will "see" the inner rim of the lens hood. I know the Cavision is wide enough that it doesn't cause this, but I don't have any experience with the General.

You can attach as many filters as you want on the front of the Raynox and still put the General at the front of that stack. I wouldn't recommend using that many filters unless you're going for a special effect, because the more pieces of glass you put in front of the lens, the greater the chance that your image will suffer. The Cavision also allows for filters to be used since it mounts to the outside of the Raynox. Other than price and the possibility of vignetting, I don't think there is much practical difference between the 2 hoods (but the Cavision looks cooler because the pros use square hoods! ).

[Ted]

Thanks again, Jack.

Being on a teacher's budget, I'm going to risk using the General hood...and if I see vignetting, then I'll bite the proverbial bullet and grab the square hood (thus looking cooler).

Appreciate your input!

[Ted]

Okay!

I took the plunge!

I got the WA converter and Hoodman LCD hood from B&H

I got the Rode VM from eBay (reputable seller) for about $26 less than B&H and it's new in box.

I got a 72 mm hood and step up ring from eBay.

My checkbook now hates me.

[Bobby]

I got an email from B&H that the Raynox HD-6600 is now in stock.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/control ... sku=227155

Bob

[Ted]

Of course they came back in stock the day after I already ordered a different one.

[Bobby]

I have decided not to buy (the Raynox) after all. I was looking at what filters I would want for it, and came to the realization that 72mm is one BIG piece of glass! Larger by far than my collection of filters for my Nikon D70 (at 62 and 67).
Jack, you have mentioned that you take it off only to slip the HV-30 in your pocket, but don't you find it quite awkward with that huge step up ring and WA lens on it?

I had a WA on my old Sony D8 that was considerably smaller and screwed directly on that lens (37mm) and did an acceptable (or better) job. I think I am going to wait until there is a custom 43mm WA for the HV-30, without step up ring.

Bob-in-NC

[Ted]

Hi Bob,

I just got my lens hood for my coming 72 WA lens and you're right...wow, it's large!

I wonder if (hope not!) the WA won't make the camera front-heavy?

[jackfalbey]

In person, the Raynox is much smaller than you'd think, and fairly light, too. The stock Sony WA that came with my PD170 absolutely dwarfs the Raynox. If 72mm glass is too big or expensive, you can always slip a 43mm filter behind the WA...

There are several 43mm WAs for the HV30, but the testing at HV20.com found the Raynox (in a larger-than-43mm size) to have the best image.

When I get a chance tomorrow I'll take a few pics of the HV20 with the WA on it so you can see the size.

[Bobby]

...If 72mm glass is too big or expensive, you can always slip a 43mm filter behind the WA...

I have read about that but never actually tried it. But that trick probably will be a bit bulky or awkward with a polarizer, which is what I was pricing.

Yes, please, I would like to see what it looks like.

Bob-in-NC

[Bobby]

Ah, how the world turns!

I just looked at the Raynox HD-66000 link that I posted above when B&H said the lens was available. Now it shows "Discontinued" and no longer available. Wonder if Raynox is going to a newer model, or ???

Bob-in-NC

[jackfalbey]

Keep in mind Bob that all Raynox wide-angle lenses with the "6600" numerical designation are identical on the inside. The alpha component of the model number refers to cosmetic differences only. Any 6600 is as good as any other 6600.

Here are the pics (it's sitting on a standard 8.5x11 yellow pad):

1) HV20 with Impact NB-2l22 extended battery and Manfrotto RC2 quick-release plate

IMG_0788_ntsc.jpg

2) with Raynox DCR-6600, step-up ring & 72mm UV filter

IMG_0789_ntsc.jpg

3 with Cavision LH-77 hood and Canon DM-50 shotgun mic

[Bobby]

Thanks for the photos Jack. Well, it doesn't look too bad, and at least it looks more "professional" with the lens on.

I did a search at B&H for "Raynox 6600" and I see that there are a number, all with different rear mount sizes - 49, 52, 55, 58, etc. The 43 is the one that is apparently discontinued. I would assume that if you have to use a step-up at all, it would be better optically to get the largest rear thread - rite??? Fortunately the black 58 is in stock, and it is actually a couple of dollars cheaper.

[jackfalbey]

It's my understanding from the research at HV20.com that the 52mm and 58mm were the most favorable. I think it has something to do with the wider rear mount putting a larger "sweet spot" in front of the HV20's lens. They concluded that the 43mm had some blurring/fringing at the edges, but a larger rear thread eliminated this.

[Bobby]

I see that Raynox recommends the 52, but I wouldn't think there would be much difference as the camera is in the sweet spot in either case.