I respect the marketing departments as much as I pity the ones who believe their lies / exaggerations. Out of all accessories and gizmos, add-ons, stickers and paint jobs for devices, in my opinion, there's no major marketing higher than that related to digital cameras. Last seen is the AstroScope 9350EOS-FF Night Vision Module.

I won't tell you any further details yet, just that all the cameras presented on its website are from the crop sensor series, unlike the FF stated in the title. Talk about credibility. Let's leave the girls and boys in the Electrophysics' marketing department alone for now and see what they have come up with.

They have recently introduced a new high performance night vision module for use with Canon digital SLR cameras, like the 1Ds Mark II, 5D, 5D Mark II, 1Ds Mark III. When using the AstroScope 9350EOS-FF, these cameras should deliver bright, high resolution green images in any night time conditions.

Because the night vision fits between the camera body and the SLR lens, all electrical connections are maintained and important lens features, such as optical image stabilization, remain fully functional even in night vision mode. The modules deliver optimum performance, sharp detail and highest quality full-frame images with no vignetting, a common problem with other night vision configurations, the company states.

That being said, there's absolutely no reason to leave them guys and girls in the marketing dept alone. How dare you lie in such a manner? Any reasonable person that has even the smallest idea about macro photography will get it that these are just plain ridiculous. Why macro? Because any macro fan knows that, by adding any tube between your camera body and the lens, you decrease its shortest focusing distance, at the same time getting a shallower depth of field. In doing that, you're also giving up the possibility to focus to infinity, no matter whether the extension tube has any optics or not.

Doing a little bit of math using the formula 1/focal length = 1/extension + 1/subject distance, we quickly get it that using even a 2.5cm tube between the body and the lens, the minimum focusing distance shortens to 27cm for a 75mm lens.

Guess what? Try focusing a 75mm lens on a full frame camera at that distance and even with the lens stopped down to f/8 (bye, bye night vision), you will get such a shallow depth of field that not even 1mm will be in focus. Now, looking at the picture, we can clearly see that the AstroScope is a tad longer than the 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS lens that measures 70mm in length. Calculate the magnification and depth of field for an extension tube that long and see what you get. All this, not mentioning the light loss from such length, that just might get your f/1.8 to a f/5.6.

They marketed the all time seller words, full frame and no vignetting and thought they'd get away with it. Vignetting occurs with 75% of lens usable on a full frame digital camera and they're suggesting that mounting your lens at the end of a ~75mm tube will not result in vignetting?

Last but not least, the suggested sharp detail and highest quality full-frame images are just as likely to happen as it is to see rain going backwards to the ski. People pay loads of money to buy longer lenses, knowing that adding even the shortest tele-converter of 1.4X will ruin image quality and sharpness.

My conclusion is that this module is not only useless but optically and technically impossible. No pricing available yet.


We are just a few, but there are many of you, Softpedia users, out there. That's why we thought it would be a good idea to create an email address for you to help us a little in finding gadgets we missed. Interesting links are bound to be posted with recognition going mainly to those who submit. The address is