Question for those who purchased the XL1s...

Rockford:

You're just the one I need to talk to. You say that you have the new 16x IIS standard lens as well as the new 16x manual lens.

Since I will not be able to afford both, please tell me which of the lenses you find most invaluable and why. I'm leaning toward the new manual lens, but many posts have touted the benefits of the image stabilizer that comes with the standard lens.

Thanks.

-- Alan

[Ozzie Alfonso]

Alan,

I'm not Rockford but let me put in my 2 cents worth. I've been working with the 16X and now I'm buying a 3X for a shoot. I can't comment on the 16X auto vs manual because I haven't used the manual. I rarely shoot in auto mode regardless of lens used. So if I had to choose I would go with the manual 16X.

Now for the 3X - an image stabilizer is really not necessary with a wide angle lens - any wide angle lens - since you're always going to be so wide that any slight movement will be minimal. With the 16X zoomed in all the way the stabilizer comes in VERY handy.

.02 cents

[Mark Chiocchi]

gratedcheese,

The stabilizer in the 16x IIS standard lens is great. I use it hand held in the church and use the 16x manual zoom lens on the tripod.

The 16x manual lens is a very nice lens, way easier to focus the lens. There is no need to have a B&W viewfinder with this lens.

The main resin I got this lens is on the tripod I can't use the auto focus cuz it goes in and out too much. Not that it don’t work good just that when I am shooting the reception my XL1s is 7 feet in the air on a tripod and when people walk in front it goes in and out.

The 16x manual lens I use a Focus Controller that's manual so I set it and it stays there.

The 2 ND filters and the back focus help out a lot as well.

When I got my XL1S when it first came out must likely I would have got the 16x manual zoom lens first then got the 16x IIS standard lens down the road.

Its up to you; If your going to shoot hand held work then go with the 16x IIS standard lens for the stabilizer.

Hope this helps.

Thanks, guys!

However, your posts have given rise to some more questions.

Concerning the 16x IIs and image stabilization: I've heard that if you're using this lens and are expecting to do something like a pan (even though it might be a hand-held pan) that you should turn OFF the stabilization feature because it'll screw up the shot. It that's true, then is the stabilization feature only good for close-in shots that are "held" for a while? (IF the above is true, that will cinch my going with the manual lens).

Rockford: you mentioned that the 16x manual is so good that you do not need the B&W finder, which is the finder I was considering. Is that lens really that sharp?

Ozzie: Could I kill two birds with one stone by getting the 13x lens and using a 2x converter? Or would that just be messing too much with the optics -- ie. would it cut down on the quality of the finished product?

Thanks for your help, guys!!

[Ozzie Alfonso]

Grated,

>>Could I kill two birds with one stone by getting the 13x lens and using a 2x converter? Or would that just be messing too much with the optics -- ie. would it cut down on the quality of the finished product? <<

My experience with converters is that you take a quality hit. How big of a hit depends on what you're shooting - shoot in low light and the lens will be much slower since the extender renders the lens effectively one to two stopts slower. Shooting in bright light the quality loss is less apparent. My advise is to have a 2x converter but use it sparingly. I would not recommend using it regularly as part of the lens.

If you really need long lenses, why not get the Canon lens adapter and use the regular 35mm lenses? This way you won't be degrading the quality, in fact, you might even be improving it.

[Mark Chiocchi]

Gratedcheese,

Let me put it this way. I had the B&W finder before I got the manual lens, once I seen how sharp it was I sold the B&W finder.

Rockford, Ozzie:

Thanks for you advice.

RockFord: How about the question I posted above about whether you have to disable stabilization on the 16x IIS lens if you are doing stuff like zooming, panning or otherwise moving the lens from one subject to another?

-- Alan

[Mark Chiocchi]

I never do

[Mike Butler]

Yeah Bill, as Barbara suggests, how'bout sharing the name of the dealer you have had success with?

For my part, I have had no trouble with B&H and other places in NYC that I have called. The ones I talk to don't engage in the scummy practices mentioned here and in other threads. But I do know that those guys exist.

I like dealers in NYC because UPS ground is only a few bucks and the item still arrives the next day. Plus no sales tax cuz they are shipping to CT. Since there is hardly any place in my area where you can look at an XL1 or anything besides entry-level consumer machines, it matters little where the dealer is located. I'll be glad to give Chris's sponsors a try when shopping for my next equipment.

[Mike Butler]

OK I hadn't seen the page with Chris's reply about not touting other dealers...makes sense. It certainly seems worth giving ZGC a try, especially if looking for a special package.

As for Uncle Charlie doing it for free with his VHS-C...you couldn't PAY ME to let someone like that take on the responsibility of shooting my important event, that's why we have professionals. Perhaps I wouldn't hire Steven Spielberg with a truckload of Panavisions either. Let the price fit the need.

In the grand scheme of things, a few pennies' difference between what two dealers charge for an XL1 don't amount to a hill of beans when you consider that we can now buy such a tool that gives us performance we could only dream about at thee times the price just a couple of years ago. This includes propelling many people into business/creative opportunities they never even imagined. I know I have made back the cost of my camera many times over so far, and I am a long way from wearing it out.

That's my 2 cent philosophy for now.