some grizzly footage from this weekend - Page 3 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Under Water, Over Land

Under Water, Over Land
Tools & Techniques for Nature, Outdoors, Wildlife & Underwater Videography.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 1st, 2006, 09:10 AM   #31
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Houston, TX (Cypress to be exact)
Posts: 169
ok so here's another question: I am going to be shooting some snowboard and skiing stuff this winter and next , and I need to get the best lens that will get out the furthest fo SD.
It will be used with the XL2, I would love to use the 2X etender, but if I can't that fine as well. Some of what I am shooting will not allow me to be close, we are trying to get full runs, (top to bottom). I will be shooting with 2 cameras, one for the close ups and one pulled back to cut back and forth from.
Has anyone had any experience doing this type of shooting?
Chris Fritsche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2006, 09:11 AM   #32
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 3,012
when you add the 2x, the focus zone becomes razor-thin, too thin, probably for shooting birds completely in focus. depending on your aperture, the DOF can be so shallow that you can, say, have just the eyes and beak in the foreground in focus, and the rest will be out of focus. you can't shoot a wide-open shutter. close it up and see if that helps. that shallow DOF is cool for photography, where you might have the face sharply focused and the body behind blurred, but it doesn't work for video, which just looks out-of-focus because the image is moving and the photographically-desired bokeh effect is spoiled. these are photographic lenses that you're using, used to deliver these effects, but it doesn't always translate to good video.

interesting discussion, guys. i always like these long lens fireside chats.
Meryem Ersoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2006, 09:23 AM   #33
Trustee
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,589
Canon make the 1.6X converter (extender) for the XL cameras, although I've heard mixed reviews of performance with the 16X and 20X lenses, but its probably the best quality you are going to get combined with the 20X lens.

http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxl2/articles/article10.php

As far as converters go (with non XL lenses), it is best to stick with 1.4X to maintain quality and some, like the Nikkor TC-14C matched with the 300mm f/2 and 500mm f/4 provides amazing quality that his impossible to judge compared to the prime lens alone (although such converters are very rare). Easier to find is the TC-14B that provides high quality performance with telephoto lenses. The newer TC-14E provides even better performance. Some 2X converters do provide good performance, such as the TC-20E.

I haven't tried the latest Canon 1.4X II converter, but it should match well with the 200mm, 300mm, 400mm, 500mm and 600mm L class lenses:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...er-Review.aspx
__________________
www.WILDCARP.com
www.NIKON.me.uk
Tony Davies-Patrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2006, 09:47 AM   #34
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Houston, TX (Cypress to be exact)
Posts: 169
are l class lens the Prime lens?
Chris Fritsche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2006, 12:00 PM   #35
Trustee
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Fritsche
are l class lens the Prime lens?
What I mean is that the prime lens alone (prime as in the main fixed non-zoom lens in use) gives the best performance, but that some top-class matched converters bayoneted together with the prime fixed lenses can provide image quality that is hard to distinguish from the performance of the prime lens alone. This is rare however, and most converters will deteriorate the image enough to be easily seen in both stills and video footage.
__________________
www.WILDCARP.com
www.NIKON.me.uk
Tony Davies-Patrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2006, 12:16 PM   #36
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Houston, TX (Cypress to be exact)
Posts: 169
So the best bet is to not shot with any extenders, (if I want the best possible picture)? I would rather have quality first, so I applied the settings that were posted earlier, what settings are you guys using for "snow"?
Chris Fritsche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2006, 06:25 PM   #37
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kent, Washington, USA
Posts: 113
Tony;
There are a lot of variables in comparing lenses. However the comparisons I have made include those made with resolution charts indoors and out, with primarily Canon lenses, under reasonable and consistent conditions. and good old every day field use.
You and I agree on the fact that the Nikon lenses may very well produce better results because of the lack of glass in the adadpter. That has yet to be proven, at least as far as I know, but does stand to reason.
The 600 FD lens is not as good as the newer 600 EF lens. Theres a difference of 15 or 20 years in technology.If the glass isn't better, at least the coatings have been improved and different lens configurations have been used.
Atmospheric conditions don't have an affect on the glass, only on the image, and cannot be used to compare lenses. A major difference in image quality can be attributed to the difference in aperture settings required for the still camera lenses. It is difficult to test with the same aperture settings between the 20X and 35 mm lenses without adding filters or increasing the shutter speed.
My comments apply to the HDV format rather than the DV format. I have found that the lenses in question, the 600 FD and the 150 600 FD do not give the video quality that the 20X HD provides. With the added auto features that the 20X provides, it is inevitable that the average videographer will obtain better overall video with the 20X lens.
As I have stated, the FD L lenses are adequate for SD, and the EF or Nikon premium lenses are also adequate for HDV. However, keep in mind that one persons idea of a good image is not necessarily the same as someone else'.
I am convinced that the Canon 70 - 200 mm 2.8 L and the 300mm 2.8 L will provide a better than "good enough" HDV image for my taste. However, it requires considerable control over the lens and the XLH1 to come up with that "good enough" image. It took me a while to convince myself of that!!

Ron
Ron Armstrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2006, 09:56 PM   #38
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kent, Washington, USA
Posts: 113
Chris; Yea The RONSRAIL is worth it. Start saving. Check out the TESTIMONIALS page on the website.
www.ronsrail.com

Ron
Ron Armstrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2006, 01:34 AM   #39
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: West Sussex England
Posts: 695
I have recently been to show in the Uk and picked a promotional DVD by Formatt Filters (www.formatt.co.uk) it featured an artical by Arthur C Smith 111 He uses these filters with an XL2 you can see samples of his work and project here http://www.auroraeducationproject.org/project.html.
The cost of a circular polariser from them here in the UK is 70. They are marketed in the states.
Hope this is of help. His artical on the DVD is very enlightening

Regards

Mick
Mick Jenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 4th, 2006, 09:59 PM   #40
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 3,004
extenders

Chris,

I have the 1.6 plex for my xl2 and the 2x century for my gl2. I also purchased a converter and a few fd lenses.

1. all converters soften the pictures, especially at the end of the zoom.

2. On the fd lenses I have a 35-200, a 300mm and a 150 to 500

I like the 300 best, the 35 to 200 second and the 150 to 500 third (this is mostly because I have found 500 to be almost unmanagable).


A ronsrail is a beautiful piece of machine work, and I will likly purchase one down the road myself.

However in the mean time I have been building my own rail out of a piece of aluminum channel and other pieces of aluminum. I am a builder by nature so I find it a challange and pleasure to make my own.

While the ronsrail may seem expensive, if you know anything about machine work, the amount of work to make one is not something to laugh at!! they are definitely worth the money!!!!!

May sound like a sales pitch, but I do not even own one!!
__________________
DATS ALL FOLKS
Dale W. Guthormsen
Dale Guthormsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 4th, 2006, 10:09 PM   #41
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kent, Washington, USA
Posts: 113
Dale;

Thank you for the compliment!!!

Ron

www.ronsrail.com
Ron Armstrong 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 > Special Interest Areas > Under Water, Over Land

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:13 PM.


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