Wide Angle Lens Question...

Main downside is that you're adding an extra layer of (probably) cheap glass between the image and the sensor. Upside is it's cheap.

At the price it's advertised for it's worth a try just to see if you like the idea of a UWA

 

I don't see any mention of how it is managing the optics.

As already mentioned, I think the lens will be lacking quality. Especially on the edges.

But, my biggest question and concern would be loss of light and how much it slows your attached lens.

 

I own both; a real (expensive wide angle) and a crap (cheap) wide angle...surprise...you get what you pay for. I took the cheap guy on a trip and now I have garbage photos from an awesome trip. If you care about your photos at all spend the money.

try renting an expensive lens from a local shop and do the pepsi challenge yourself.

 

your other thread said you already spent the 5 bills, that will certainly be better than this option.

It comes down simply to whether you value the lens enough to keep it for the money spent or whether you want a cheaper less IQ conscious option to play with for wide shooting as opposed to seriously use.

if you need/want wide and don't want to spent the money there is always the software option, stitching a number of frames together to get the FOV you want.

I'd stitch a series of images before wasting(MHO) money on the glue on piece you reference.


"NEW! Deluxe 52mm Wide Angle Lens 0.45 X PROFESSIONAL HD

HIGH DEFINITION SUPER WIDE ANGLE LENS WITH MACRO

Japan Optics , Premium Rimmed Glass

GUARANTEED NOT TO DISTORT THE PICTURE!

Works on ALL Cameras & Camcorders with 52mm size Lens Filter thread!!!

LENS BAG is included!"

all for $10, LOLOLOLOL

it's the intake vortex generator promising mpg & HP of the photography world...

 

If it's only $10, why not just go ahead and try it. cheap wide angle = edge distortion + brightness fall off. If you like the look of wide angle pictures, you can always buy a better lens later on