17x lens for hd100 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems
GY-HD 100 & 200 series ProHD HDV camcorders & decks.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 15th, 2007, 07:00 AM   #1
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Cambridge MA
Posts: 204
17x lens for hd100

Has anyone used the 17x lens for the HD100? If so, how much better is it than the stock lens? Would I still be able to use the same matte box? How about the 18x lens - why such a higher price? Thanks.
__________________
Bill Parker
www.hindsightmedia.net
Bill Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2007, 07:29 AM   #2
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
I've got a 17x. It's 1/2 inch longer than the 16x, and a little heavier. The glass elements are larger in diameter and the front filter holder is metal instead of plastic. i've run a few field tests witht his lens. It seems to have an improved CA over the 16x, but, CA isn't gone. The CA seems better across the zoom range, but, if you're slightly out of focus, the green/purple shift becomes quite noticeable. Overall, the 17x seems a lot better made.
Bill Ravens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2007, 07:57 AM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Cambridge MA
Posts: 204
Thanks for the reply. Would the difference in quality be noticeable in an interview setting? That's where I do most of my work. I'm thinking of saving my money for the 13x which would give me more options.
__________________
Bill Parker
www.hindsightmedia.net
Bill Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 16th, 2007, 12:09 AM   #4
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 244
i'd be interested in purchasing someone's spare stock lens if the price where right.
email me directly.
terry
Terry Nixon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 16th, 2007, 07:28 AM   #5
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
Bill...

The stock lens will work quite well in interview situations. The problem with chromatic aberration is only at full zoom in.
Bill Ravens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2007, 03:36 AM   #6
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 497
Well that's it: for nice shallow depth of field you'd like to shoot as much in tele as possible (and open up your iris of course), but then the CA poses a problem... Is that any better on the 17x and how much would you say? (I know this is a difficult question to answer).

Also: do you use IDX or A/B? What's the balance like with the 17x?
__________________
High-Definition Video Consultant - CEO of Delimex NV - http://www.delimex.be
gear of choice : http://www.wespgear.com
Werner Wesp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2007, 04:42 AM   #7
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Cambridge MA
Posts: 204
I always shoot zoomed all the way in and I haven't had a problem w/ CA. I just looked over my interviews and I can't see it at all. Maybe it's because I'm in a controlled lighting situation. I also don't open my iris up all the way if I can help it - it keeps me closer to the sweet spot. Once I get my shallow dof and have sufficient light, I stop. Of course, the camera is by now miles from my subject, but I've learned to deal with it.
__________________
Bill Parker
www.hindsightmedia.net
Bill Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2007, 05:18 AM   #8
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Parker
I always shoot zoomed all the way in and I haven't had a problem w/ CA. I just looked over my interviews and I can't see it at all. Maybe it's because I'm in a controlled lighting situation. I also don't open my iris up all the way if I can help it - it keeps me closer to the sweet spot. Once I get my shallow dof and have sufficient light, I stop. Of course, the camera is by now miles from my subject, but I've learned to deal with it.
is the image appreciably sharper than the stock lens? this thing is about 3 grand right?
Brian Luce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2007, 05:46 AM   #9
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Cambridge MA
Posts: 204
I'm actually using the stock lens. I'm curious to know if I'd see much of a difference with the 17x.
__________________
Bill Parker
www.hindsightmedia.net
Bill Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2007, 07:48 AM   #10
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
I can try to give you guys an answer, but, keep in mind my answer is pretty subjective. IMHO, the 17x lens is better than the 16x, in terms of CA, however,I've noticed that it's very sensitive to mis-focus. By that I mean the CA increases quite quickly as you go out of focus. So much so that I actually use the purple/green fringing to find the right focus. When in focus, the CA disappears....pretty normal for a long zoom. At full zoom, the 17x is definitely superior to the 16x, but, keep in mind the next class up is the 18x, which sells for $18k. Don't think $3k will match the quality of the 18x.

Werner...I'm using the older IDX brick battery system because it's compatible with AB. With the IDX battery and an FS-4 my HD110 is really nicely balanced. It has a tendency to want to roll to the right, but, as for front/back balance, it's really comfortable.
Bill Ravens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2007, 01:59 AM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Parker
I always shoot zoomed all the way in and I haven't had a problem w/ CA. I just looked over my interviews and I can't see it at all. Maybe it's because I'm in a controlled lighting situation. I also don't open my iris up all the way if I can help it - it keeps me closer to the sweet spot. Once I get my shallow dof and have sufficient light, I stop. Of course, the camera is by now miles from my subject, but I've learned to deal with it.
I do that too, but the shallow DoF is the real killer for my lens. The subject (that's in focus) really looks nice, but the plants that are out of focus on the background (e.g.) have purple parts instead of just being green. Especially around the highlights, where light shines through (if you have a background as in the lowest picture here http://users.telenet.be/wespproductions/)...

With the shallow DoF, a big part of the image is out of focus, but that part is tinted somewhat due to CA. It's that I want to get rid of. I question if the 17x will be any better. Also the wide angle is marginally wider, that can come in handy sometimes...

(I'll post an example later)
__________________
High-Definition Video Consultant - CEO of Delimex NV - http://www.delimex.be
gear of choice : http://www.wespgear.com

Last edited by Werner Wesp; January 18th, 2007 at 04:03 AM.
Werner Wesp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2007, 04:51 AM   #12
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Cambridge MA
Posts: 204
Clips w/ & w/out CA

I've just uploaded a couple of JPG's from two interviews. One has what looks like CA and one without. I have no idea if this will work as I've never tried this before. It's not showing up in the preview window- let's see if it shows up in the post. If it does, the difference I see is that the clips with the light background shows the CA whereas the clip w/ the subdued lighting in the background doesn't. It may be a function of avoiding too much white or blowing out your whites. Does that make sense?
Attached Thumbnails
17x lens for hd100-clip-w-ca.jpg   17x lens for hd100-clip-w-out-ca.jpg  

__________________
Bill Parker
www.hindsightmedia.net
Bill Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2007, 07:52 AM   #13
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
Bill..

absolutely. i've noticed that CA appears much worse when overexposed. I took some footage of the recent snowstorm we had. The footage showed very noticeable green/magenta blooming at the interface between the snow(light) and the trees(dark). As you can imagine, the exposure range was probably more than 8 stops, so the snow was blown out.

sorry guys, I really haven't had much time to use this lens. It's on my short list to run it thru f/stops and zoom ratios. Mechanically, this lens is much better built than the 16x. I hate that plastic filter holder on the 16x. I'll post some frame grabs when I get a chance. I did manage to get one framegrab with the 17x, full zoom, f/4 here->
http://www.geocities.com/ravens202/Image0.jpg

Last edited by Bill Ravens; January 18th, 2007 at 08:27 AM.
Bill Ravens is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:52 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network