Image Examples 220lens 220º and Canon G12

by **robert steiz** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:19 am

Who says you can not make good panoramas with 2 full fisheye or 3 Drum Fisheye. Now you can do it very easy with out problems with the lens 220lens 220°?
Here are a few examples and Master Images ( also projects and templates )
Photos taken with a canon g12

: Panorama 220lens 220º; Panorama 4 Drum 220lens.jpg (35.51 KiB) Viewed 17328 times

http://www.220lens.com/Gallery.htm

: IMG_0483.JPG (9.29 KiB) Viewed 17328 times

: IMG_0481.JPG (8.82 KiB) Viewed 17328 times

2 Full Fisheye 220lens
http://www.220lens.com/download/220lens ... isheye.rar
3 Drum 220lens
http://www.220lens.com/download/220lens ... isheye.rar
4 Drum 220Lens
http://www.220lens.com/download/220lens ... isheye.rar

by **Trausti Hraunfjord** » Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:23 pm

Beware!!!

This is a complete scam.

The lens in question is Opteka (google for Opteka 220°lens) and costs normally around €110 ... so people can get 10 of these very low quality lenses for the price of one advertised here.

Just ignore this spam, and make sure that you check things properly before making any purchases.

by **Trausti Hraunfjord** » Tue Feb 22, 2011 6:23 pm

The links are ok... provide images taken with this lens... so it is helpful for people to decide NOT to buy it... the quality only leaves more to wish for... and one won't get it.... not even for double the price of this 10x overpriced Opteka.

by **robert steiz** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 3:13 pm

You seem very sure of what you say, it's easy to think of something that you do not. Either way with all my respect, I own a 220lens and I know the OpteKa
and has nothing in common.

Opteka
Rear Mount Diameter 37mmmm
Front Element Diameter 101mm (Does not accept filters)
Length 75mm
Weight 610g/21.5oz.

220Lens
Rear Mount Diameter 58mmmm
Front Element Diameter 104mm
Length 73mm
Weight 625g/1.37lb

Here you have a virtual tour taken with a 220lens.

: 220lens1.jpg (26.87 KiB) Viewed 17231 times

Vitrolux - 220Lens Nº 136 & Canon PowerShot G12, 3 Shots Drum

Created by Robert Steiz:

360º Images Virtual Tour ( PASS: 1234 ) "link here": http://www.espacios360.es/Area_segura/5 ... rolux.html

Greetings

by **Trausti Hraunfjord** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 4:50 pm

As I said, the quality is horrible.

And your claim of the "Opteca" have nothing in common with the 220 lens... may be true, since there does not exist any lens (to the best of my knowledge) named "Opteca". I did say Opteka - with a "K" and not a "C".
If you meant to write "Opteka", and still claim it to have nothing in common with the 220Lens, it would be idiotic at best... but more likely it would be a deliberate lie. You offer this claim with "all your respect".

I find it quite disrespectful when you are trying to pass off lies as being the truth.

What you could have done, is to announce this to be what it is: Rebranded Opteka lens... rebranded with a gluey sticker put over the Opteka name on the lens, and a badge glued to the lens cover, and that you sell the lens for 11 times the original consumer price available on Amazon, because you value the sticker and badge this greatly.

No sane person would or should consider purchasing anything from you, since you can not even be truthful about the real brand of the lens. What I suspect, is that people wouldn't even GET a lens from you if they'd order, but that is of course pure speculation, based on the way your "honesty" is coming through.

For everyone who wonders if I am completely off the track or not, you can see the "differences" for yourself. Click the image to expand it fully, or scroll it with the mouse wheel:

: 220-Opteka.jpg (105.81 KiB) Viewed 17228 times

General warning:
Beware of scrupulous and shady characters who try to cheat you out of your money!

by **robert steiz** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 5:07 pm

With all due respect that you do not have your customers, you have definitely lost your head. I will not waste my time, you qualify yourself,
Greetings

by **Trausti Hraunfjord** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 5:28 pm

So you are admitting to being a pathological liar, incapable of admitting being wrong or deceitful.

HOW are the two lenses different, apart from the glue sticker over the Opteka name, and the badge glued on the lens cover? Can you explain the differences in a way that clearly shows that I am wrong, and you are telling the truth?

What is the difference in quality between the rebranded Opteka and the original Opteka? Both build wise and image wise?

The truth of the matter is that you are trying your best to cheat people into buying a sticker/badge for 1500 dollars. If you were an honest person with a lens that had no relation to Opteka, you would provide proof of it being so. You don't, and that is simply because you can't. These lenses are the same.

by **rolex_geneve** » Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:00 am

Trausti you are wrong, I´m a proud owner of 220lens ( two lenses nº 181 and 182 ) here I´m sending you a photo. ( Even they look diferent from the ones that you show and 220lens web ).
Its a excellent lens!
Regards

: Baxis.JPG (95.11 KiB) Viewed 17214 times

by **Trausti Hraunfjord** » Fri Feb 25, 2011 1:22 pm

Eduardo.

This actually confuses me... the user "rolex_geneve" is a real person... yes, the nick name might indicate something different, and I did delete his account a while back when I was clearing out spam accounts.... bad oversight by me, since he is a FFC customer and not some kind of a spamimal.

I still have to say that the lenses look identical, and for me to be convinced of those two being 2 different lenses, is going to take quite a bit more than a few statements of it being so.... Everything looks the same, including the writing on the lens... except for the sticker on one... where I am completely sure that one will find "Opteka" down under it... or a scratched area where it has been sanded down to remove the name.

It would help to see a technical drawing of the lens build, see the various elements and compare that with the Opteka lens which ... according to Robert, has NOTHING in common with Opteka. How about a video of someone lifting the sticker on the lens, and showing what is beneath it... or removing the badge from the cover?

On the issue of removing privileges and links and other stuff from a human that is posting... nah... it's not up my alley. I respect people's right to say what they say... even when I completely disagree with them... and when I changed the title of the thread, I felt that to be too intrusive as well...

Most places on the net are ran by power hungry fascist wannabees who feel a need to show their "might", and to hit others over the head with "I decide, not you!" ... and that is something I can not, will not do. It goes against everything I see as sane and sound.

Genuine spam, where no human interaction is behind the posts, is a different issue. That I will remove as soon as I trip over it.

Wiping out people's words or forbidding them to express themselves... is very rude... I can't get myself to do that in most cases. Of course... an exception can always be made, but there would have to be a solid reason behind such a decision for me.

"rolex_geneve". Could you please provide more CLOSE UP images of your lenses from every possible angle? And I would also be interested in knowing why you would purchase these €1200 lenses, rather than the original Opteka that costs only €108, and from what I can see, the image quality is exactly the same.

If I am wrong, then I am wrong, and I will gladly admit to that.... but until now I have not seen anything that indicates me being wrong, and as Eduardo has pointed out (unknown to me previously) this issue has been addressed in both Panoguide and NGpanotools... where things supposedly went into a bad direction, where people were spammed directly to their email accounts... that is not something one would expect a genuine and honest person to do. So clearly there is a good reason to suspect the worst.

by **robert steiz** » Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:53 pm

I followed the links that provides eduardo and all I see is that ViewAt has send an email to its members with a special 220lens offer. The one who sends the emails is ViewAt.org??
The worst of these forums is that any fool (Eduardo not give the hint) can say what they wants and laugh!.
The reason for this post was to show images of 220 degrees, it was irrelevant whether they were of 220lens or any other brand.
The truth is that one will take away the desire to continue participating in this post.
Lets see who is the Pano Fools that replay my post?
gambling? too easy, Edu...

Grettings

by **Trausti Hraunfjord** » Fri Feb 25, 2011 4:28 pm

ViewAt was defined as the sender, but they have denied having had anything to do with the spam. I could easily send out mails, making them appear as coming from president@whitehouse.gov

The fact still remains that these lenses look EXACTLY the same. Everything about the lenses is the same... apart from the sticker and badge... and the "marketing strategy".

Do you have a link to a http://dpreview.com review of the 220 lens? Some other reputable photographic site that has had the lens up for evaluation and review? I can't believe that making a brand new lens of this kind would not be followed up with professional reviews as well.

It has nothing to do with desire to participate in this discussion or not. You have claimed this lens to be unique, and counter-claims from all over say differently, and the imagery I provided does seriously support the claims that this lens is nothing more than a re-branded (with tape and badge) Opteka.

People deserve to know the truth.

I know of NO lens producer who hasn't provided their lenses to be tested by relevant professionals, and dpreview would be one such source.

If it is not Opteka, then what is it? Some Chinese copyright infringing replica of Opteka? It has to originate from somewhere? The looks and measurements of it look 100% identical to the Opteka... so your claims of it having "nothing in common" with Opteka read anything BUT true.

by **Trausti Hraunfjord** » Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:41 pm

Eduardo Hutter wrote:Not forgetting the 1000% overprice tag...

That's only money... not worth anything in real life terms, so that's "irrelevant"

by **Alison Bell** » Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:41 am

Hi all, I am professional photographer and owner of a 220lens No 72 and really Ido not understand the discussion of this post. I attached some pictures of the 220lens. It's a superb lens and now can not be compared with anything similar on the market.
Greetings

: p_0002.JPG (114.09 KiB) Viewed 17129 times

: p_0009.JPG (146.63 KiB) Viewed 17129 times

: p_0010.JPG (125.84 KiB) Viewed 17129 times

by **Trausti Hraunfjord** » Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:18 pm

Alison Bell wrote:It's a superb lens and now can not be compared with anything similar on the market.

Sorry, but I need more information. You claim that it can NOT be compared to anything similar in the market. You are saying that it can not be compared to Opteka? Why not? What is the difference between Opteka and your lens?

What are the material differences, the build differences, the price differences, the guarantee differences, the quality of image differences?

I am still completely sure that it CAN be compared to what exists in the market, especially when it comes to the Opteka lens.

Have you tried to lift the sticker from your lens to see the Opteka brand name down under it?

Can you show us a video of you removing the sticker the first time?

And again I request a review of this lens by a known independent source.

..... and I find it quite "funny" (not really) ... that Robert Steiz and Alison Bell happen to share the same internet provider.

Clearly we are dealing with fraudulent people who are using stupid methods to rebrand a lens with a sticker/badge, and sell it for ten times the price (and then some).

Trausti