Royal lens with CX100/105 - quality

[Newbie 0]

Hi all

After 6 years of my faithful PC9, i'm going tapeless and have taken the plunge and bought a CX105. I have a couple of Royal Lenses which i use, but from what i gather, they are not best suited to capturing HD footage because the resolution is lower than some of the HD specific lenses being talked about in the forum.

My question is, to what degree of degradation/image quality will i use if i just continue to use my Royal Lenses? To be honest, i don't really want to have to sell them, and i really like them, but if it's not going to cut the mustard and give me the full HD res, then i'm motivated to look at other lenses that are being discussed here.

Is anyone using the Royal on their CX100/105? Any links to footage? Thanks to anyone who can provide some steer here.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[PhreeZone 14]

Royal's are not even SD level resolution. Putting it on a SD camera usually does not matter but on a HD it is clear as day that its not HD resolution.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[frost 1]

I've been using Royal lens since the early days on my PC1000, continued to use them on the HC3, then HC5, then CX7 and now on CX100. Yes the loss of resolution is very noticeable if you shoot in HD mode, but still better than SD footage.

I lost a HD Raynox 3030 due to a riser strike last year. Bought a replacement, that lens is great, but now save it for "quality" jumps, when something interesting or cool might happen. For every day "boring" stuff i will continue to use my trusty low profile Royal .3 and .5 and shoot in SD. At least until HD monitors on DZ with card readers become the standard.

[mnskydiver688 0]

I don't know, I guess for archiving purposes I would want to have the top quality footage available. That and you never know when something interesting or cool will happen.

Sky Canyon Wingsuiters

[Fast 0]

Quote

I don't know, I guess for archiving purposes I would want to have the top quality footage available. That and you never know when something interesting or cool will happen.

Agreed.

Also, you can by a Century .55 that resolves to HD if you are cool with not having a .3 and the lens is only about $100. That's what I did. I personally think that the footage with a royal on there is total crap. (I have one and was using it on aff for a bit so I could get those extra close shots, now I just do a better job of panning the student with my head.)

~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

[velocityphoto 0]

I just received a liquid .2 for my cx12 and it is awful! See the attached screen grab?
It arrived with a scratch or something on the lens that will not come off so it's going back.

I have a century baby death .3 too but don't want to beat it up doing handcams .

A friend will bail you out of jail , a REAL friend will be sitting next to you in the cell slapping your hand saying "DUDE THAT WAS AWSUM " ................

[bomb420 1]

Way too many lenses, may too many cameras but can you pick out from the following video:

Eloy 100 Way Head Down World Record tryouts

The following configurations?
Cx100 in SD mode with a scratched .2
CX100 in HD mode with a new liquid .3
Cx100 in HD mode with a century .5
HC1 in HD with a .43 Op.
Hero Pro Wide Angle

-Trunk

HYPOXIC

[velocityphoto 0]

It's a cx 12 set to wide conversion lens ,HQ SD mode, manual focused liquid .2 lens.

A friend will bail you out of jail , a REAL friend will be sitting next to you in the cell slapping your hand saying "DUDE THAT WAS AWSUM " ................

[bomb420 1]

* Cx100 in SD mode with a scratched .2 -- Pretty Obvious

* HC1 in HD with a .43 Op. - From below footage

* CX100 in HD mode with a new liquid .3 - Relatively clear footage with vinnette

* Cx100 in HD mode with a century .5 - Above footage, view from cockpit

* Hero Pro Wide Angle - deployment/ swooping footcam

Hope this helps out this conversation and people can really see the difference.

HYPOXIC

[velocityphoto 0]

I have a royal .3 that works just fine on the cx12 with no vigneting.I wonder if royal makes a .2 or .25 that has no vignetting?
Or what's the black eye .25 that i see sometimes like?

A friend will bail you out of jail , a REAL friend will be sitting next to you in the cell slapping your hand saying "DUDE THAT WAS AWSUM " ................

[TitaniumLegs 8]

I just got a CX100. Stuck my Royal/Diamond .3 on it and the center looks great but the edges are crap - look out of focus. Also some colour bleed along edges - the edge of my arm looked blue in uneven light. Trusy old Kenko .42 looked better, but still not optimal.

This was just in the living room. I'll try it jumping too.

Raynox 3032 on the way.

(>o|-<

If you don't believe me, ask me.

[mnskydiver688 0]

From the sounds of it, I am glad I went with a Century .55x. Might not be the widest, but I have been very impressed with the footage. When I get the settings with the camera right.

Sky Canyon Wingsuiters

[Cyrus79 0]

Quote

I wonder if royal makes a .2 or .25 that has no vignetting?

I've tried my Royal .2 with my CX-100 and there's no vingetting at all...In fact I'm very happy with the (SD) results and will be using it for handcam.

[pangbom 0]

Thank you so much for doing such a visual comparison with different wide angles for the cx 100!

Let me just get this clear:

00:26-00:28 is the cx100 with the liquid? All from below is the HC1 00.52-00.55 is the SD mode with the scratched .2?

So whats your summary on the subject on a wide angle for the cx100? I'm buying a lens for it and apart from all Ive read here on DZ is that personally i'd prefer a small lens that doesnt stick out too much. No snag points for me thx. Ive watched the raynox 3032 on it and footage looked great but a single element lens would be sleeker. What single element wide angle would you recommend for the CX100? If you had to choose one :) Based on quality and as little vignetting as possible.

Thanks, Heffie, Sweden

[bomb420 1]

It always depends what you are doing with the setup. I really like the .5 century lens and the Raynox 5052 for inexpensive lenses. If your shooting for comp, in SD, a liquid or royal .2x would be fine. If you are doing tandem vids I would go with the .5 century. If you are doing production quality vids in close, with consumer cameras use the century .3 baby death.

From what I have seen I think the lens for screw around freefly jumps in probably the raynox HD3032 right now, although if you are used to framing you can get away with the century .5. The century .3 is just a ton of glass for zoo freefly jumps. IMHO.

I have not tried the opteka yet so I have no idea about that lens.

-Trunk

HYPOXIC