Product Description

In designing this lens we successfully controlled the color aberration and distortion of picture image at the least, and could reach to the highest resolution power of *350-line/mm at center. Mounting threads is 58mm. Compatible with SONY VX-2000,DSR-PD150**, Canon GL-1/2,XM-1/2 Front filter size is 72mm. Nominal 0.66X(Actual 0.66X/diagonal, 0.66X/center). Size/Weight : 75mm x 36mm 178g * MTF 30%. Equivalent to 1890-line/TV(1/4" CCD),2520-line/TV(1/3" CCD). **The picture becomes soft focus beyond 6X zoom telephoto position while wideangle lens is on the camera.

Product Details

• Brand: Raynox
• Model: RAHD-6600P
• Dimensions: 2.20 pounds

Customer Reviews

Disappointment with Raynox product
This review is not for this product specifically, but more on the quality of Raynox products themselves. I have included below the transcript from a series of e-mails between Raynox and myself. This is unedited, exactly as the exchange went. Needless to say, I am very unhappy with their product and their customer service, and I will never buy another one of their items. I offer my experience only to help others avoid a waste of money. Read my story and make up your own mind. But, at the very least, take careful consideration before buying one of their products. The one positive thing I will say about Raynox is that they DID respond to me in a very timely fashion, their first response was within 45 minutes of my e-mail. I just wish the content of the response would have been as pleasing as it's speed.

Me:
Within the past year, I have purchased two Raynox lenses for my Sony Mini-DV camcorder. I purchased the DVR-3000, for $120.45, and the DVR-5000, for $49.95. To say that I have been disappointed with these
products is an understatement. With the DVR-5000, the wide-angle lens, when I was zoomed-out completely, there was severe vignetting, and when zoomed in, the only clear part of the image was the very center.
Everything else was distorted and fuzzy. I put the DVR-5000 in my closet and purchased a competitor's lens, as I was already out of my 30 days since my purchase. Unfortunately, I did not need the DVR-3000
for several months. This past weekend, I used it at the San Diego Chargers football game to take 73 digital stills. These images looked fine on my LCD screen, but when I got home and downloaded them to my computer, I found the exact same problem that I had had with the other lens. But, this is a telephoto, I'm SUPPOSED to be able to zoom in. The images were all fuzzy and distorted, except for the very center.
These images are absolutely useless to me and have proven that I wasted almost $200 on Raynox product. Now, I have to purchase a competitor's lens, for a lot more money, and I am unable to do that at this
time. Therefore, not only am I out of my original investment, but I am losing business, as I am a professional videographer. I wanted to give Raynox an opportunity to correct this. Please have someone contact me by e- mail or phone.

Raynox:
I do not know what camera model you used but DVR-5000 is a standard quality wide-angle lens and like every conversion there is no " Perfect matching" for some camera models. The DVR-5000 works perfect.
I would suggest HD-5000PRO for present mini-DV camcorders. The DVR-3000 is not designed for digital stills and the quality is up to standard TV screen resolution.

Me:
I am currently using the Sony DCR-PC330. Now, my bigger complaint is with the DVR-3000. What am I supposed to do if my video is also fuzzy? It's not just the digital stills, and it's not a resolution problem. It's that the entire image is fuzzy and also has some color distortion.

Raynox:
Again, there are no "Perfect Matching" for some camera models.

Me:
Ok, I am just trying to understand this. The lens fits physically perfectly to my camera, without an adapter. What do you mean by "perfect matching" and how can I tell if that's the problem?

Raynox:
The DVR-3000 is long discontinued . The camcorder you are using is over 3 megapixels and not recommended to use such a lens .

Me:
Well, I can't say that I am exactly happy with Raynox's answer. You have basically said that the lens is not of a high enough quality to operate with my resolution, and we're only talking 3 megapixel here. I would still have to say that I will never buy another Raynox product. The fact remains that I now have to spend $250 on another lens and basically throw away the $120 Raynox lens I have already purchased.