Xl1/2 users solution/petition?
 

An idea. What if every XL1/2 user reading this signed a petitioned to a company like Sigma. It would outline that we want them to build a lens for the XL1/2 that contained a ground glass element inside it. Something close to the size of a 35mm frame. Behind that a relay lens. A single lens solution.

It still wouldn't solve the viewing problem but that could be temporarily solved by flipping an external LCD.

Josh, this is the sort of thing we need to get rolling---- I'm like Roger and not too mechanically minded but there are people here on this board who are geniuses in this area. Just read some of the other threads in this area, it makes my brain hurt these guys understand this stuff so well.

From what I gather it would take a VERY FEW number of people together to get a machined adapter made very inexpensively.

Ok let me explain this idea in better detail since I just kind of touched on it earlier.

It seems to me that of all cameras the XL series has the greatest advantage to being a system that can obtain 35mm DOF characteristics. Which is probably why the Mini35 was first presented with the Xl1.

Now the mini35 is one solution which allows you to attach nearly any kind fo 35mm lens to it. It then rotates ground glass and the image and send it through a relay lens to the CCD's on the camera.

In this regard its a great camera for a professional engieer to build off of. But for every day folks like us here it's a problemchild since the native lenses are so large and finding a relay that can hook up to it would also need to be engineered.

This idea is to petition a company like Sigma to build a single lens solution. Where the front of the lens is your standard 35mm lens elements that then hit a static ground glass element of a certain size. Say 24mmx18mm. Then a small relay lens to bring that image into the cameras CCDs.

All of this within a single lens barrel as if it was just a lens itself.

There are two benefits to this that I can see.

1. The lens can be designed to fit the ground glass. Which means the flange to focal plane distance could be shorter, better optimized, ect.

2. The company in question could sell multiple prime/zoom lens at various lengths/prices. It wouldn't be a one adapter fits all solution but and entirely new series of lenses. All they would need to do is start with one prime lens to test the market. If It sells well, if they already knwo there are people wanting to buy it, then they could find themselves in business making a variety.

Now I don't know whether it's possible for a company like Sigma to do this or not. It would certainly take some R&D funding. It would also mean you would have to find your own way to flip and image. That is an easier to solution then the lens itself as it can be done electronically with various LCD screens. But the XL mount has been around for close to 8 years now and carried over 3 cameras. If the trend is for Canon to stay in the 1/3 chip range on future XL cameras then there are more cameras to come that support this lens mount. Plus an existing market of people over the last 8 years.

The way I look at it is like this. Even if it cost me $600-700 dollars for a single 50mm prime that can do this then it's worth the money. Because it's still a tenth or so the cost of a Mini35. And for people like me a mini35 is not an option with that much money that needs to be put down at one time.

Here is the petition I am about to start. Please correct or help me clearify if need be.

---------------

To Sigma

We the undersigned seek you out as the world's largest independent manufacturer of lenses. We are owners and users of the Canon XL series of digital video cameras. The XL1, XL1s and XL2. All of which contain the same lens mount.

We are seeking you out in the hopes you will build for us a lens or series of lenses which can display the depth of field characteristics of a 35mm camera onto a digital video camera.

This would be a lens that contains a fine ground glass element inside it. This finely ground glass then acts as a screen for the larger image coming from the first series of lens elements. An image that would then be focused onto the XL series 1/3 inch CCD imaging block via a second series of lens elements.

We understand this would require us to rotate our footage 180 degees for proper playback and viewing. But this is insignificant in comparison to the task of engineering our own lens system.

We are professional and independent videographers, filmmakers and hobbists. We need your help.

Thank you

---------------

I don't think it is a bad idea, although I would form the letter a bit different.

Instead of saying you want them to do the R&D, you could say that this had already been achieved. What we are looking for is a manufacturer who can pruduce uniform lenses with precision and high quality components. Something that would improve on an already successful design. That way, we are contracting them for their manufacturing abilities, not for their engineering (the most expensive part of a lens).

Explain specifications of the lense generally, don't necessarily mention its purpose or application:
a lense with the xl lens mount, a "relay" lens that is capable of focusing on a 36x24mm frame at a very close distance (under 3 inches, the closer the better) with a pcx condesor lense between relay and gg, then a nikon or canon lens mount at the correct flange depth from the gg, if the gg was considered the film plane.


Include that we would be willing to pay up front, and buy in bulk.

We don't need them to manufacture prime lenses for us, we can use nikon or canon lenses. OR pl mount, using cine lenses

cine lenses are something I personally don't want to use at this point, mostly because of cost, but possibly in the future.

I think it would be important to write it in a way that makes them think this is feasable and simple for them to do, and a way for them to make a profit. Exclude information they don't need to know ie: flipping the image, pleading for help etc... approaching them as professional clients expecting a professional response is important, we want the manufacturer to take us seriously.

their costs=
xl mount
relay lense
condensor lens
ground glass
nikon mount
construction costs
if they make them in 100 or so quantities, i bet it wouldn't be too expensive.

Since they make lenses, not much R&D is required. This is a simpler process than making an slr, as there are no mirrors involved.

I think we need to keep the xl 35mm threads in once place to get the momentum moving again.

I feel like my creativity has been stifled since I got it in my mind the idea of achieving 35mm dof, now I don't want to shoot, but I haven't gotten a functioning adapter (mostly because of lack of funds and time)

my 2cents
stephen birdsong

oh yeah, lets hear who would want to do it and how much its worth to you.

What you are suggesting is for them to build us mount like a mini35.

The idea above is for them to build us a lens or series of lenses specifically for the XL1. Where the ground glass is embedded inside each lens sold. Since they are lens builders I would think this is something more along their lines then just a generic mount convertor with ground glass element.

But I'm willing to be open minded about it. If an adapter would be ultimately more successful and easier for them to produce, then that is the route to take. Perhaps we should suggest to them they use their proprietary Sigma mount on the other end rather then a Canon or Nikon mount. After all they are trying to sell their Sigma lenses on their own mount. If they knew they could tie us in with their lenses on our video cameras then we'd be more likely to buy their Sigma SLR cameras for our still work.

I do think we should tell them what it will be used for. After all they need to know what the goal is or how would they test that it is working properly.

I don't think this should be approached as a one time deal for a limited order. I think it should be approached as an entirely new product to be sold to the general public.

Ok, check out the post by mike tesh, lets put our heads together on how to arrange manufacturing and see how many people would be interested in going along with it.

This is something I might be willing to spearhead if need be.

I'm going to try and get a sample of my progress up today..
We shall see if it is successful, I have to assemble my set-up again outdoors and my gg substitute is of pretty poor quality.

but its something, I figure we gotta start where we are and move on from there.

stephen birdsong

Big problem, they (Sigma or whomever) would have to license the lens mount and other technology from Canon. Canon is very, very, unlikely to grant another company license to their mount etc.

ok, so I threw something together. funny thing is, after setting up for bout an hour trying to get it to work properly, right when I start rolling, my roomate walks in the door, so thats what you get to see.

here is it is:
http://sbirdsong.greatnow.com/35mm test/35mm test 1.mp4
be sure to have some sort of pop up blocker, because this web host blows.

there is some weird green discoloration, thats because there was alot of open air between lenses, and it caused a real hazy lens flare.

Anyway, its super soft because of many reasons, the first being that my gg isnt really gg, its hollywood frost and just isnt sharp enough.

the chair was about 72 in from the film plane, and I have no idea how much of the "gg" i captured. It is pretty narrow though.

my "prime" is 50 mm, and my relay is 50mm (not even close to being wide enough) but thats all i have at the moment, so thats what we get.

stephen birdsong

Jeff how is it that Sigma gets by making lenses for the EOS system? Or for that matter how did that 14x Fujinon lens get fitted to an XL mount or the relay lens for the mini35? All of which have been sold commercially to fit the XL series cameras.

I'm not saying you are wrong by any means. You would know more then I.
I guess if worse came to worse we could petition Canon themselves. I justed figured that since they already had XL lenses on the market they would want to sell those first.

Sigma licenses the EF mount from Canon. However, they choose not to buy the chips in the lens from Canon. That is why Sigma lenses at times need to be "re-chipped" in order to stay compatible with Canon EOS camera bodies. The Fujinon lens was modified after market by Optex if I remember correctly. The mini-35 is probably an after market modification too. You can buy the mount, but the chips are more of an issue. Too small of a market to spend the R & D to make your own and Canon probably wouldn't sell their chips.

Well that certainly makes sense. But it's still worth a try. I'm not after an AF lens myself.

Stephen, can you post some pics of your unit as well???

Don't know where that green cast is coming from--- but you can see the DOF happening.

Considering that not only the XL1 but now the XL2 would use the same adapter I'm absolutely positive we can get some people together to go in on a group buy.

yeah, tomorrow I shall try again. I ran out of sunlight, so tomorrow I will start earlier. Ill take pictures too.

the green haze is coming from stray light mixing between lens stages. you'll see what I mean when you see pics.

Stephen

ok i did an expirement, a little better done this time.
pictures of setup, and comparisons with normal lens.

im adding some text to the pictures and I gotta figure out a good way to show them, maybe throw together simble html file...

will be up soon..

stephen birdsong

http://sbirdsong.greatnow.com/35mm%20test/35mm%20test%20web.html
again, make sure you have use pop up blocking (safari, firefox) cause this webhoster is crap.

Ok, so as you can see through the pics, this is done pretty shoddily, but it proves the concept.

I did a comparison between what I was capturing through my setup (50mm) and what 50mm (1/3 inch equivalent) through the 16x would be.
http://sbirdsong.greatnow.com/35mm%20test/movies/35mm%20test%202%20low%20res.mp4

That gives us 2 things:
it gives a comparison of dof, and it also shows that I am not actually getting the proper size frame off the gg, Im getting a much smaller frame, which tells me I need a wider relay lens than a 50mm (duh, I coulda told you that).

Wish I woulda thought to get a comparison of the actual framing, then I would know a % of what I am getting, then I could use that percentage and get a wider lens based on that percentage.

The front element (everything besides my relay lens) is very far from the camera. This is bad. It is because I'm using a 50mm lens, thats just the closest I can get it in focus.

Drop me any questions, I'll be watching the thread.

stephen

There is absolutely no need for any chips, or any adjustability either.

Your going to have a big "No Lens Attached" icon constantly blinking in the viewfinder. This was a big complaint about the Fujinon/Optix lens by some users.

I had the 14x manual, which to the best of my understanding had no chips, and the "no lens" never blinked. I *think* that as long as something is in the xl mount, it can sense that.

thanks Stephen.

Man, that GG you are using is like a quadruple fog filter but you can see the DOF and know you are on the right track.

Actually, the "check the lens" warning only comes up when you first power on the camera and quickly goes away.

At least that is the way it works with the real Mini-35.

yeah, now that you mention it, thats true. I was messin with my cam today, and realized that it did go away.

im ordering:
http://www.optosigma.com/miva/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=OS&Product_Code=pg211&Category_Code=Filters+%26+Apertures
a 50mm gg from this website, so this should greatly improve on the image quality (maybe now I can actually get an image to seem in focus).

and I'm going to try to find a used camera store where I can purchase a cheap 20mm lens.

stephen

Stephen, if you put a '[' and then 'URL]' and then the link followed by a '[' with '/URL]' with your link in the middle (had to write it like that so it doesn't think I'm trying to do HTML and pick it up as a link) it will be clickable.

Steven.

Perhaps try drawing several concentric (each inside the other) rectangles on clear plastic (stiff sock or business shirt wrapper).

You might have to scribe the lines first with a pin or compass point before the ink will take.
Make sure the rectangles are on the same centre, maybe join the corners through the center with diagonal lines.

Place the compass point in that centre then draw a circle the size of your groundglass internal diameter, cut out the circle and stick this piece of clear plastic up against your groundlgass.

Two of those retangles should be the still-camera image frame the size which I don't know and the 24mm x 18mm motion picture 4:3 image frame.

Hope this helps.

Bob, good idea, ill give that a try in my next round.
Along with it, I will also do a comparison of the actual framing, with the regular 16x lens. It will be interesting to see the dof/compression difference while achieving the same framing.

It will probably have to wait untill next weekend, as I get home from work and the sun is down. If anyone has any suggestions, I will try more things.

Trying to order the real gg, maybe it will come before sat. wishful thinking.

stephen birdsong

A big suggestion:
 

This is a promising idea, but I would petition the cheapest manufacturers that will give us the same quality system.

As the differences in various camera formats and mounts relate to size of image plane and flange distance from image plane, and on the video side, relay lens for cameras, then it is possible to make a universal adaptor for not much more cost (and as it has universal sales volume can decrease costs). It would go:

Lens, to quickly connect/disconnect any lens, each one would have a:
------
Lens Mount/Flange distance Adaptor (LMFDA) (this modifies to the correct flange distance for each different lens).
------
A static MF sized film plane/condenser with universal LMFDA connector to take 16mm, 35mm, SLR and MF lens.

Ideally for guerrilla doco low light situations, you could mechanically flip this out of the way and flip in a large optic to squeeze the image down to camera format with lots of light.
-------
Camera mount for each camera, containing Macro/relay lens to suit camera used (for when you want upgrade camera).
--------
To reduce cost and complexity: Different Lens electronics/mechanics handled in the film plane component, which provides universal mechanical controls/pass through signals, that the LMFDA reroute to that lens format (the LMFDA is actually dumb but passively handles the mechanical and electronic rerouting to the lens).

All you do then is buy the right LMFDA for your lens (if you only use one type of lens, like EOS, then you only need one), the film plane, and the right matching camera adaptor. As it is MF film plane components are big enough for a high quality 35mm picture to sit inside without optical distortions. You just need to ask for good triplet lens (to totally correct chroma etc) and the best film plane (custom microlense, Beattie?? screen, etc) for HD+ resolutions.

Actually it would be good if it also included standard quality, 2*ND's, CPOL, IR/UV, and Skylight (maybe colour correction as well) filters (the bottom of the barrel containing a belly where they can be pivoted up in from).

This would give them the whole market to sell to.

How much, $1000-$300, and that should be much better quality then the custom jobs and at least as good as the mini-35.

If they want to stratify the market (as they ussually do), and make more money off the more expensive cameras and more expensive lenses, then they charge more for the adaptors for them, and less for those with cheaper cameras. Still that should mean that complete setups (with at least 3 cheap SLR lense adaptors) still range from $300 to $1000.

I'll leave you boys to your fantasy with one last thought. Sigma is unlikely to want to make a lens as you describe. They don't have any experience making video lenses for this type of camera. However, Tamron does make video lenses. But Tamron is probably not in a position to start a new market in their financial position. In fact most camera and lens manufactures are struggling financially right now (not Canon). Why would they spend R&D dollars on an entirely new market when they need those dollars to stay competitive in their core business?

Critics & cynics, are often in the fantasy land of denial at the cost of logic.
 

Ahhm, I can answer that one, to make money. In business, when your up against the wall, having cast off all the excess baggage, cut wastage to the bone, not innovating is a good way to go down with the sinking ship. If there is too much competition and the ability to easily innovate conventional lines is stretched to it's limits, new sorts of "needed" products is a good way out. The old saying, that you have to spend money to make money. The question is, how "needed" is the product, if it is a small market then $5K+ will be the price, if it is a big market (like a universal adaptor, the only different items are very simple relay lens adaptor for each camera) then under $1K is possible. My suggestions are for mass market production cost advantages and for appeal to customers.

To say that a camera lens company can't make these lens systems, is to insult them and to accuse them of being dumb, as they are all optical lenses systems with modest differences in hookup that even home builders have worked out (Let alone compitent engineers). So give them a break, let them try, you never know what they can achieve unless they try.

..

First things first we all need to get on the same page with what we want.

If we are going to petition a company to build an adapter we need to specify what exactly it is. And it needs to be as simple to manufacture as possible. That will ensure a better possibility it will get made

Wayne although your idea of a two part adapter would be the grand resolution to all things, I'm not sure a company would want to support that many lens mounts. Especially when it comes to medium format lenses as well. I would think that would raise the cost a little more since it would require a larger piece of ground glass.

We may have to make some sacrifices. As I said in an earlier post if we petition sigma we know they have their own SA lens mount and lenses they build for it. If we approach them saying we want an SA to XL mount adapter with ground glass element to retain 35mm DOF then they would possibly be more inclined to build it. Knowing they would tie us in to their SA mount and hence when we bought a digital SLR it would possibly be a Sigma model because we already have the lenses. That would be a good business move for them.

Our sacrifice would be the purchase of Sigma SA mount lenses. I know this isn't the most optimal solution for those of us who already have a bunch of lenses for a different mount (I'm a Nikon user myself) but it would be a good route for them and solve our primary problem in turn. Which is DOF control for the XL1.

Does this make sense to the rest of you? I'm trying to think about it from the perspective of both the end user and company in question.

I don't think we should propose it as something they should consider adding to their catolog, or marketing to dv enthusiasts, we should approach it as requesting them to make a certain amount for our purposes and requesting a price quote.

My opionion is that this is an alternative to going to a machine shop. A place you give your specs and they build what you need, because they have the tools and expertise.

Sigma is in the same position as that, except they build lenses, that is what they do. We do not need them to do massive R&D. We give them the specs, they should know how to accomplish it without any R&D.

We need way to attach it to our cameras, some sort of xl mount. We need a lens that will allow our cameras to capture a 36x24mm frame off of a gg, and a mount in front of that gg at the correct flange depth. To a lens maker, this may be a strange request, but certainly not difficult or prohibitively expensive. There are no moving elements, everything could be locked down.

Xl mount could be a problem if it needs to be licensed. for the front element, I would vote c-mount or f-mount. Im not terribly interested in sigma lenses, but as you say, it may be a selling point for them.

stephen

by the way, I've read in other threads where people have arranged this sort of deal with japanese lens manufactureres, this is why I am optomistic..

not 100% sure, but it seems if they will send you the relay lens, than all you need is to build the gg and mount in front of it. if you look at the pdf of the innards of the lens, you can probably deduce where the "relay" ends and the gg element part begins. If there are no more optics (besides gg), then yes, all you have to do is put a gg in front of it and get a mount.

everyone check out the other thread, its starting to see some more life.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...5&pagenumber=3
stephen birdsong

I was ordering my gg from optosigma today, and I spoke with an engineer. They do custom manufacturing. Its as simple as that.

He gave me lots of advice on the lens (alot of which I did not understand). And he said that I need to figure out exactly what I need and they would do it.

that was easy.

Of course, I did not get a price, that could be the catch.

He spoke of it as if it were easy, and something he could do in half an hour. (design the lens).

so, back over to the other thread where, hopefully, we can get this ball rolling and figure this out.

stephen

Mike, I'm not really biting into the debate, I just gave advice about the most economical and marketable solutions. If you go to a pricey manufacturer with a low volume market you will get very expensive product, like just for XL users (we are talking thousands of units to start to get economies of scale, hundreds maybe not). You might as well go to an engineering firm with a worked out design for a custom order. If you have high volume, with quality low priced manufacturer, then you can get lower price than going to an engineering firm with small order. My design suggestion allows an manufacturer to target hundreds of thousands of users. The price of adaptors is cents (for casing) to dollers (for mechanical lense control mechanisms) in this sort of volume. The price difference between 35mm and MF focus screen/condensor lenses (furthure relay can be normal size) to their respective manufacturers is going to be dollers as well. But this is only an idealistic suggestion, MF is not really needed for most people). You could specify only the most common lense mountsd (Nikon, Canon, etc). So if you pick the right company they can get the parts cheap, or manufacture them cheaper, but probably not in runs of less than thousands (hundred thousand is even cheaper).

You probably could go to them with a XL1 system , with a backup universal system suggestion if they don't think the XL market is big enough to worry about for less than $5-10K a peice.

Well that's my input, I'm not really interested in it for myself (though maybe a universal one). Just remember when the HD Canon models come out you'll want one for that too (so the best GG would be best to start with, I'm wondering about something simular to the Canon laser bright focusing screens which have 220 million microlenses) . Mike, have you thought of talking with people in the Alda/Agnus threads and Canon forum to gather interest. Like you, the people there have also been talking about ordering batches of custom adaptors in times past. The people there could probably input into a complete design that could be made at an engineering firm?

Wish you luck.


Thanks

Wayne.

Okay, we need to start somewhere and I guess we need to decide where that is.

Are we going to start looking around for someone capable of fabricating an adapter for a relay lens to attach to the XL1s?

This seems to be the place to start for me--- at least I think it is.

Do you think that the P+S relaylens has somekind of a freshnel lens built in?

Just yesterday I was reading through the latest issue of "Outdoor Photographer" and ran across an ad for two new Sigma lenses.

The interesting thing though is that they were designed *specifically* for small format digital SLRs! Isn't this _precisely_ the thing we have been needing? I'm not sure how large the chips in a DSLR are but if they are currently making lenses for the purpose of removing the magnification factor I think they could certainly work something up for 1/3" chips...

This, if I understand the problem correctly, would give us 35mm lenses without the need for GG and loss of light.

<<<-- Originally posted by Aaron Shaw : The interesting thing though is that they were designed *specifically* for small format digital SLRs! -->>>

canon makes these as well they are called "efs" lenses, they basically set the rear element back so its not so close to the chip, reality is i feel its more marketing then anything else, i have seen little difference using these types...

as for lens petition its a good idea, i feel that there is a market for primes with real manual focus controls...with 3 generations of the xl mount out there it should pay off well, if a mini 35 can be made for 10gees by an upstart a tamaron or sigma should be able to build great lenses with there eyes closed...

with all this talk about an open lens system for under 6 grand i still can't put a prime on my camera for under 10grand

Found one of the lenses. Couldn't find the other oddly...

The two new lenses are 18-55mm and 55-200mm giving good coverage of both wide angle and telephoto. Both will cost MSRP $319 USD (together).

http://www.sigma-photo.com/Html/pages/18_50_EX_DC.htm