Patrick Wright posted this in the XL1S 'post pics of your rig' thread:

---------
Heya,

Thanks for the compliments. I really havent had time to go out
and shoot enough good examples to do a proper comparison but
weather permitting I hope to get around to doing more this weekend.

The lens is an Angenieux 9.5mm-57mm wide angle for 16mm with an Arri style
Bayonet mount http://www.quicktel.com/users/archamian/adapter004.JPG that
has a speed range of F1.9-22 (T1.9-22). I really wanted a high quality fully
manual lens that wasn't going to cost me $1500+ and also I hoped it would give
a greater sense of DOF so I picked this one up on ebay for $350. I chose the
bayonet mount because they are plentiful and seem cheaper overall than PL or
other more modern mounts. Also they still produce new lenses with this same
mount so if I wanted a lens with modern optical coatings id have an upgrade
path. Because the lens is 16mm format the magnification (about 1.8) and loss of
DOF is much less than 35mm lenses which have magnification factor of about 7
and lose significant DOF.

The adapter itself is comprised of two main pieces. The body is made
from aircraft aluminum while the mount is a factory xl1 stainless steel
([url] http://www.quicktel.com/users/archamian/adapter005.JPG [/url) mount
you can order from Canon USA in New Jersey for $45. The adapter
body cost $400 to produce at a local machine shop though they admitted
that if they made 20+ the price would drop to about $75-$100 for the body
not counting the cost of the factory mount.

Overall I would probably have been better off just buying a manual lens that
was made for the XL1 but I am very happy with the results and the total control
this setup affords me. Also I can buy used 16mm lenses for much less and there
is a significantly wider variety of lenses to choose from now.

As for the mini35s I'm also working on an Augus35(moving) and Aldu35(static)
of my own and though I have the DOF I wanted the filmic look some are achieving
is very desirable. Yes, much of the filmic look can be achieved in post but I like to
get my footage as close as ideal as possible to reduce the amount of post work.

I hope this has answered your questions, if you have any more please email me.

--Patrick

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

Patrick is a great guy and answered all my questions so I'm sure he'd be willing to help out if any of you think this sort of thing would move us along?????

so, the benefit is: bayonnette mount would be cheaper, as would the lenses, we could just use those lenses instead of the schneider lens or 35mm slr lens?

Am i understanding this? Is this going to actually be much cheaper?

stephen

Kevin, can you give a link for ordering the canon factory xl1 mount?

Wait, it's Patrick who ordered the mount. Could you ask him for me?

And that's a good idea using the 16mm lens.

Okay, just to clarify, you guys really want all of these threads merged into a single gigantic one:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=33522
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=23451
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=33168
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=23377

Do you want a copy of each of the originals left intact, or do you just want to throw 'em all into one big pile?

I'm down with one pig pile..
One place for all the xl1 info.

stephen

I don't know Chris... that'll end up being like the 3000+ thread for the Agus and Aldus topics---

I'll go along with the concensus but I think if we copy of important posts, important information we can consolidate the information on the XL1 project.

What does anyone else think?

It seems some people dont know DOF basics, so look at this online DOF calculator:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

(select for example a subject distance = 2meters and
change the focal lenght and f-stop, the effects are impressing)

To calculate, you must know the size of 35mm movie (not still) film is rounded 22 x 16mm and the Canon XL sensor is only 4,8 x 3,6 mm. This means the Sensor is round 4,6 x smaller than 35movie film (35mm still film is 36 X 24mm and for this the factor is 7,5x). So you need only change the focal length by this factor (not the film format size)

For DOF, you need more parameters: focal length and F-Stop

Because the size factor is 4,6 (compared to movie) you need a 4,6 x smaller focal length if you wont the same point of view. If you now wont the same DOF you must push the F-STOP high.

Thats why the F-Stops are verry important. But the CANON lenses have no manual IRIS, so you have no change to know what F-Stop the CAMERA have for the moment.

This is a reason why a full manual lenses is better, if you dont wont a GG solution. But if you use a manual lenses with not so good F-Stops like the original canon, you take a step backwards.

A different ideal is to modify the CANON lens with a otional manual IRIS poti. We have this made, its very simple.

The resulting thread would be 12 + 49 + 32 + 110 posts long, or just over 200 posts total. Long but not unmanageable compared to the Agus35 and Aldu35 threads. If you guys can reach an agreement, then I'll be happy to merge them together.

I'll leave the final decision to a consensus but for me having a 200 post long thread kinda makes it impossible to get through rather then going through and pasting over only the most important or relevant of the posts.

If we merge them, it will be no longer than if we have to go through and search through all 3 threads for an individual post, in fact, it will be faster because its all centralized. I like the idea of merging all, because anyone interested in this topic would have only 1 place to go, the active thread. If we leave the other threads open, then it still has the effect of splitting up the effort. I vote merge.

stephen

Or duplicate the nested forums that we have for Quickstream and Firestore in the Direct-to-Disk (Tapeless) Recording Solutions forum.

Create an XL1/XL2 sub-forum here and dump all the related threads into it. Forget about turning this thread into a single dogpile which would be a mess because I see this thread as a fresh start and prefer it clean and lean.

My 2 yen.

ok, sounds good.
Lets just make sure this stays the active thread and the others remain simply for reference.

As soon as I get my check card in the mail (just moved state and changed banks) I will order those optics.

What are other people doing?

Does anyone have a 20-25mm 35mm still lens?
If so, that would help us over our first obstacle, figuring out distance/focal length to capture 36x24mm frame.

stephen

I am probably repeating what someone has already mentioned. If so please ignore with my apologies.

One needs to know the flange to focal plane of the Canon XL1 lens 3 x CCD combination, or the distance the CCD "sees".

My method for doing this would be to take the XL1 lens, set it towards a target and position a groundglass behind, then position the groundglass for the sharpest image, then find alternative prime lenses to do the same to find the flange face for that lens relative to the XL1. I would use this method as well as known distances and calculations as I don't know if there are other optics in the path from the XL1 mount through the prism to each of the CCDs in the camera. If they exist, then a simple measurement of the flange to focal plane of the alternative lens will not be valid.

This may be difficult if the XL1 lens is a servo lens like most camcorders and cannot be set to a fixed known distance to target.

Once this is established, then experiment onto a closer target the size of the ALDU preferred image frame size, by moving the lens forward of the flange face until the frame size match is found.

Instead of messing with a groundglass and magnifier and lots of eyestrain, a single-chip security camera into a large TV display would be a handy alternative unless you use the XL1 camera itself. I don't know if it will operate without its own lens installed.

I hope I am not throwing too many people off into a dead-end by this suggestion.

1500 grit ground glass
 

hi everyone I made a static adapter with the optmo sigma 1500 ground glass and yes it was the best ground glass yet . I built the first adapter out of 52mm filter rings I can not get the lenses precise enough in the filter rings . I have just placed a order with thorlabs for a stackable lens tube and two retaining rings I will be using the 1500 grit ground glass and aplcx 50mm lens with a focal length of 60mm the tube will allow fine tuned focal length
from the camera lens and the ability to fit the plcx directly on the ground glass. in this stackable tube we could build any combination we might need.

http://www.thorlabs.com/ProductDetail.cfm?DID=6&ObjectGroup_ID=213&Product_ID=1481


http://www.thorlabs.com/ProductDetail.cfm?&DID=6&ObjectGroup_ID=1132&Product_ID=36117

this is link to the static adapter made with optmo sigma ground glass http://www.dvinfo.net/media/mellor/35%20mm%20lens%20test%202.jpg

Kevin.

I jumped the gun and started posting on the new combined thread.

Before you splash out and buy the expensive 25mm C mount lens, try your secondhand store and see if there is a Cosmicar 25mm C-Mount lens. That is what I tested with.

You still have to have to C-Mount to XL1 adaptor. With that installed you could probably justify to a security company coming down to their shop and trying out a whole bucket full of their lenses on the cam in their shop.

Alternatively the CS-Mount security camera lenses will mount to C-Mount with a plastic spacer. Both have the same thread and the spacers could be stacked until the back focus is right. They are also relatively cheap and are no loss if filed down to be thinner and it doesn't work first try.

A 25mm C-Mount lens is also used on some video taps on CP16Rs.

Why do you think P+S use a 850,- lens?
Mount a security camera lenses on your XL and compare the picures with those from the Schneider lens. There are worlds between.
If you wont, we also have security camera lenses, down to round 35,-$ but the pictures are so bad, that you also can use a very bad still GG. If you wont this, do it.

that's okay, Bob... actually I'd like to move all of it over there so we can all be on the same page.

relay lens
 

hi everyone I have been looking for this part for some time . thi s may be what we need to make a relay lenes it's a component
for a stackable tube system from thorlabs with proper lenses
and advice from optmo sigma .it has a focus adjustment of 1 1/2 inches . this could also allow this adapter to be fitted on any camera.I am sure we can make a great relay' for less tha a thousand dollars. heck this is laser stuff . It's made to be
precision. I wish the parts were cheaper but I have wasted a lot of money on 5 devices agus, aldu,et al .It is time to build this out of quality components.. even the components will retain part of there value on the used market


http://www.thorlabs.com/ProductDetail.cfm?DID=6&ObjectGroup_ID=214&Product_ID=1486

Laser works only on a fixed wavelength and have only a small beam.

Photo optics must be color corrected and sharp not only in the middle. This why the constuction of a good photo/film lens have much more than two lenses. Here is a datasheet with a inside look of the Schneider Kreuznach lens. Look at the lens design:

http://www.schneideroptics.com/oem/c-mount/visible_spectrum/pdf/xenon_095_25.pdf

color correction
 

this movie was made with a homemade adapter with condenser lens . {life agaiist memory}. color looked ok to me


www.triggerstreet.com

thoughts while shaving
 

I think there is a short window of use that needs to be considerd .
the mini35 sells for 7,000- 10,000. this allows small ccd chips
to attain shallow depth of field. the movie life againist memory
was made with a less than $300 homemade attachment
shallow depth of field was obtained ,and I think greatly improved
look and feel of movie . all of these devices will degrade image
even the holy grail mini35. my purchase of say $500 in laser componets would still have the value of the laser componets in 5years .in five years nobody will attach a device that degrades the image. when 35mm lenes can be attached to ccd that are 35mm . our device will not be used. but our components will
still have value . If made from laser componets

By the way this thread now contains all of the previous XL1 adapter topics merged into one. I left the largest one, Canon XL-1 Relaylens intact for your research, but closed it in order to drive replies here, where they belong. Hope this helps,

Cool, thanks chris!

stephen

Ray. I appreciate where you are coming from.

I suggest using the cheaper lens to establish the working principle then each player, if they want to take it to the next stage of image quality to then go for the more expensive lens once they have established their rig works and they feel comfortable spending more on it.

I used the 25mm Cosmicar C-Mount lens for 8 years for stringer TV news assignments on a 16mm film camera. It is of better image quality than some of the more modern security camera offerings which was why I suggested people chase them secondhand. They should be relatively cheap. The image shakes a little when you move the focus barrel but once set and locked in an adaptor it won't be shaking because nobody will be moving it.

My work was accepted for broadcast by our national broadcaster so the lens can't have been all that bad.

Bob,
Okay, your right. Maybe it will be a good idea to produce and sell 2 different 35mm solutions. One sheap, just to have ideas what 35mm DOF means. And another with same, or better quality like the P+S

Cosmicar lens sounds good. I think , this one was produced for 16mm, so the quality must be better than for security cameras. What F-stop is it? .

Rai.

The Cosmicar is a television lens. It was sold to me in 1969 as a film lens for a Bolex. I onsold it to the TV station I bought an Auricon off. It went into their museum. I went and bought another secondhand 11 years ago. This one is a little more battered but performs as did the other.

Here are the details :-

COSMICAR TELEVISION LENS.
25MM
1:1.9
No. 21094.

The f-stop range is f 1.9 to f 22.

Okay, I think it's time to talk agenda.

the primary focus of this thread (as long as everyone agrees) is to:

Develop, as a group, a simple and inexpensive Aldus35 (spinning ground glass) device for the XL1, XL1S and the XL2 Canon camera. I believe that after this configuring for a static version would me much easier.

This includes figuring out the best lenses or type of lens to be used, the focal lengths, ect and materials needed for the optimum design.

Most specifically, this thread is to find solutions to specific issues such as lens adapters and use our group discoveries, finding vendors and possibly making group purchases to lower the cost to each of us for these solutions.

Yes, sounds good to me.
One comment. I would say that we are going for a static gg, because once we achieve that, we can work with people with other cameras to achieve the moving gg, since it has nothing to do with the xl1. In other words, the dilemma faced with the xl1/s/2 is the relay lens. The vibrating gg, is another dilemma that every 35mm adapter faces. Our biggest resource at this point is collaboration, so lets target this in a way that utilizes those resources to their fullest.

my 2 euros.
stephen

so you think that it would be easier to create a static gg option then a spinning one?

I would have thought the opposite but I trust your opinion on this more then my own since I haven't built any of them

For the database a bit of tech spec. I rang Canon here to see if they had any dead, drowned or wrecked XL1s to do some match engineering on. = No go. They crush them if the customers don't want them back. They gave me the flange to focal plane distance which appears below with others.

Canon XL1 - 20mm.
C Mount - 17.5mm.
CS mount - 12.5mm.

Given that the C Mount lens has to be brought forward about 3mm - 4mm to get it to focus close enough on the GG, the adaptor would have to be sunken in the middle to position the C Mount lens back far enough but the actual flange face for the close-up function being asked of it would be close enough to the same as the Canon face.

Being positioned furthur away from the focal plane, even the 1/3" lenses may throw a big enough image to be adequate.

Bob, that is interesting, I did not realize this was the case. I was under the impression that c-mount had a deeper (longer) flange depth than xl mount. So could it be said that the larger the format, the closer the flange depth?

You are correct about the focus distance, the engineer I spoke with at schnieder optics mentioned that if I needed to focus closer than 6 inches, than I needed to add a spacer to increase flange depth, which will allow me to focus closer. He gave me a number to work with to calculate exactly, but since I am not at home, I don't have access to that info. Will post when I have access to it.

stephen

Is anyone doing any physical expirements, or are we just discussing theoretical possibilities?
If the answer is no (to the first question) get out there!!!! pvc pipe is cheap, gg is cheap, and im sure you have some lenses out there, whether they are ideal or not, get your hands dirty! (but not your lenses)

<<<-- Originally posted by Stephen Birdsong : Bob, that is
Is anyone doing any physical expirements, or are we just discussing theoretical possibilities?
-->>>

Oh, I'm totally theoretical, hypothetical, whimsical. My feet are hovering 20 feet from the battle ground because I don't own a XL2 to anchor me down and allow me to take the next step. It's fun having a excuse to slack.

Relay Lens
 

Okay I know this isn't the cheapest version out there, but is there a certain reason against using a 35mm prime lens and a lens adapter for the relay as Dino did with his static adapter? I picked up a 24mm f2.8 off brand eos lens and am working on a eos to xl mount now. Is the reasoning for looking at c mount options optical or the price? Also does anyone have access or know of a place to get body caps for the XL? I've looked and fount front lens caps, but no body cap. I'm working on a mount and trying to avoid wrecking the one that came with my camera for the mount prototype.

yes!
 

i think this is good to have a consolidated xl thread, now we have some brains (Bob Hart) and some fresh ideas under one roof. there are probably a number of issues we can handle collectively and reduce the costs and r&d associated with the complexities of a lens adapter for xl systems.

Rai is right on with that S&K lens setup (pg. 8). that would be an example of the "ideal" relay lens, there are a couple of vendors, one in india and the other in the UK i was communicating with about fabricating basic components to build xl "kits" also. my india contact never responded back with a quote. i also worked at pricing out a few, because some people asked the constuction costs, you can make them in a range of a few hundred dollars for cheap ones, if you happen to have one or two good (wide fast) lenses around, or for as much as $1300 or so, which is what my present unit roughly costs, and it costs much more than that in testing and equipment that i bought and it didn't even work. but in the end, i'm not really a lens maker, or seller, i'm more, just a guy who shots his own films and i just want to make my camera better, so i can tell a better story.

i got most of my stuff from hardware stores, ebay, and optical places. i put all my lense models i built, 1 Agus & 2 Aldus', in my kitchen or sitting on my coffee table lens grinding while i watched orson welles movies.
you need 4 things, a dremel tool, goggles, cement glue, and a glue gun, the rest, i think, is just part$.

i was thinking of sending a note to my UK contact, who makes xl to eos and xl to nikon adapters. he makes the cheapest around (like $120 usd) and i think would be sure to consider a bulk deal if we went and purchased from him, so i will inquire.

my only other question that hasn't been answered from my last posts was talk of anamorphic lenses for the xl lens adapter. i'm not sure if anyone has any info on that, who would like to share, but i would be interested getting 1:85 porportions. i'll probably look into making a smaller version of the lens adapter, anamorphic in the coming months.

Regarding getting hands dirty. I did some C-Mount lens tests into a single CCD crimcam. I have an old Bolex with vintage Schneider-Kreusnach lenses on it so I might re-do the tests. I originally published the results here on one of the Aldo or XL1 threads but I have got such a slow landline speed here I haven't gone looking for that post.

From memory, I think the 25mm lens had to be too far away from the GG to be useful onto a 1/3" CCD for a 24mm x 18mm 4:3 frame. For the larger still-camera format it might be usable.

The Century Optics 16:9 anamorphic lens works fine on front of a 55mm Micro-Nikkor, so-so on a 135mm telephoto (Auto-Tamron) also so-so through a cinemascope lens (Proskar Anamorphic.) With the longer lenses distance focus to infinity seems to go off. Closer focus out to about 60 feet seems to be adequate. Those tests are viewable as .jpg files on www.dvinfo.net/media/hart.

Dino, glad to see your still around, we could use your expertise.

You can probably immediately solve one of our first obstacles.
What focal length (in 35mm lenses) have you found to be ideal in capturing the 36x24mm image off of the gg, and at what distance.

do you have the hotspot problem? If so, what measures have you taken to reduce the undesired effect? Have you any experience with condensor lenses? If so, what have you found?

I am planning on purchasing some lenses ie:
achromatic doublets to test as relay lens:
http://www.optosigma.com/miva/mercha...matic+Doublets
condensor lenses one in front, one behind gg:
http://www.optosigma.com/miva/mercha...herical+Lenses

as for housing, I will probably stick with pvc. I may look into purchasing that fine tuning housing that someone posted about a few days ago.

stephen

hey stephen,
let me see if i can help any address your questions.... as far as focal length, since i am not technical i'm not sure how to answer that. everything i've done i've just "eyeballed". if your asking me how far my relay lens is to my Acromat is roughly 2 inches. i'm using a 24mm f2 with 1 +4 and 1 +2 close-up lenses that get me the closeup image on the Acromat. From the Acromat to my GG is roughly less than 1 inch. i prefer the acromat over any condesor lens because it not only color corrects but the quality is tops. condensor lenses are much cheaper but acromatic diopters are better all the way around.

i got my Acromat off of ebay for $50, it originally came from Newport Optical, they have 7 - 50.8mm versions. and 50.8 also fits perfectly in a 52mm ring! so pick up a couple of Skylight brand clear 52mm filters, they also unscrew nicely-and come in handy more often than not. so i'm not sure of the focal length or which 50.8 version i bought since it didn't have any papers.

i see you are considering trying a theoretical approach, sandwiching two condesor lenses between the GG. in theory it should work, acording to papers i've read. i would stick with PVC, i believe 2 inch will fit a 52mm reversal ring to perfection. if you can find an internal reducer for the 2 inch PVC (2inch to 1.5) a reversal ring cemented firmly will fit like a glove. with it's strong metal threads it will hold firmly.

here is another "field" test i did with my 2nd lens adapter shooting some graffiti in williamsburg. i didn't use any support rods and had everything hot glue gunned together so at the end of the shoot my heavy 55mm lens slipped out of the casing (i had not glued it at the time because i wanted to see if i adjusted it correctly) and it fell to the ground and got banged a little-but it still works. you will notice my lens is dirty as i was just shooting and moving, testing out how one might use and hold the unit. check it out here (warning: 15fps, 75meg download!!! as i wanted to not put so much compression on there and try to keep it raw so you can see how it works)
http://www.dinoreyes.com/images/graff_seq.mov

here is the page link also: http://www.dinoreyes.com/images/lensadapter.html

i've since improved the GG and have a better 3rd version because i did some good testing so far. as far as hot spots, i believe, but i'm not certain that good grinding will take care of any problem like that. also, adjusting lighting can also help. and, ever so slightly you can see a bit of vignetting on the edges, but it actually looks a bit stylized if you like that sort of thing.

also, bob, what i am refering to as far as anamorphic lenses is, instead of using a standard GG that i use a "circular cylinder lens" and grind the flat side. because there is so MUCH unused image on the GG, being the CCDs pick up such a small amount of the image of the GG, it would be nice to put a cylinder lens inside to make a true 1:85. do you have any knowledge on the amount of cylindrical bend one might need to get close to the 1:85 porportions??

Dino.

You be a braver man than I in taking the AO up to a precision piece of glassware. My understanding and very inexpert at that, is the cylinder lens in an anamorphic adaptor is only one half of a matched pair.

I see no advantage in aquiring an anamorphic image off the back of a "groundglassed" cylinder lens versus having the lens in front of the SLR lens. Any defects from the groundglass texture still get stretched in reproducing the image. But don't trust my opinion on this.

stephen,
check out this link from edmund industrial optics. i also had a bit of a dialogue with them on understanding and trying to improve the optics of a lens adapter system. in the end, they said it would run in the neighborhood of 5-10k to have a professional take a look at the problem xl systems face. but this article covers the technique you described for your system. i chose the achromat type system because of it's one piece and reduces adjusting.

http://www.edmundoptics.com/techsupport/displayarticle.cfm?articleid=267&search=1

-d

That's pretty intersting Dino.

Okay... let's try putting together a shopping list-- or at least bounce some ideas off each other for components.