There is something on Chris Hurd's watchdog pages about a soft focus problem with Canon lenses set to small apertures (I think any number larger than f11). Not sure if this applies in this particular case, or even if it applies to the 3X lens at all, but the solution was to use an ND filter or faster shutter to open up the aperture.

Change of focus while zooming sounds more like a back focus problem though.

Article referenced is at http://www.dvinfo.net/canon/articles/article19.php.

Most common issue with the 3x however is the Pxel Averaging phenomenon common to all wide fields of view in DV.

Tom

I know of at least one other 3x lens (mine) that has this issue, and it is not the "pixel-averaging" phenomenon that Chris refers to...it is a backfocus issue (one I haven't taken the time to deal with). Another member contacted me and said that he had the problem and that canon was not able to fix it. I'm hoping that this isn't the case with mine (or yours).

you can see an example of my problem here:

http://homepage.mac.com/barrygoyette/FileSharing25.html

notice how I'm able to refocus the image after I zoom wide...this indicates that it is a backfocus issue, not the typical wide angle softness often seen on DV. Otherwise the 3x is extremely sharp...perhaps a little crisper (when focused) than the 20x at the same magnification.

Barry

Also, in addition to Richard's comments, keep in mind the other extreme as well. Shooting wide open (f1.8) will yield softer results than if you were shooting stopped down, ie. to 5.6 etc. because of the shallower depth of field. Every lens has a sweet spot which yields maximun sharpness but in some of our cases, since we are trying to obtain the shallow DOF in our images, we would most likely be shooting wide open a lot of the time. If we are shooting wide open, or close to it, the focus has to be right on otherwise your subject will be slightly out of focus and thus soft since the point in focus will be narrow at 1.8. It may be a backfocus issue if you're using the autofocus switch to get your subject in focus. But in manual focus mode, it isn't a problem since you're using your eye to determine what's in focus or not (our viewfinders are a little small and it's hard to tell a lot of the time). This leads me to believe the lens may be soft wide open or suffers from the drift problem Tom stated. Also, don't rule out the fact that you may have a lens from a bad batch. In that case, I would have Canon or the store you bought if from replace the unit.


Andrew

<<<-- Originally posted by Barry Goyette : Tom

I know of at least one other 3x lens (mine) that has this issue, and it is not the "pixel-averaging" phenomenon that Chris refers to...it is a backfocus issue (one I haven't taken the time to deal with). Another member contacted me and said that he had the problem and that canon was not able to fix it. I'm hoping that this isn't the case with mine (or yours).

you can see an example of my problem here:

http://homepage.mac.com/barrygoyette/FileSharing25.html

notice how I'm able to refocus the image after I zoom wide...this indicates that it is a backfocus issue, not the typical wide angle softness often seen on DV. Otherwise the 3x is extremely sharp...perhaps a little crisper (when focused) than the 20x at the same magnification.

Barry -->>>

Holy cow Barry, I just saw your vid and that's a nasty problem! They are definitely designed not to do that and I'd try to get my unit replaced. The zoom in, focus, zoom out technique is universal and your lens shouldn't be an exception. Your second zoom out seemed okay though. Any chance the focus ring was accidentally touched when you zoomed out on the first zoom?

If I understood the video example correctly, the second zoom out was performed on a 20x lens, not the 3x as a comparison

correct..the second zoom was with the 20x...the origin of this clip was a comparison of the two lenses...then I realized I had a problem...I'll be contacting canon soon, and let you all know if there is a resolution.

Barry

I've been hearing tids and bits of this phenomenom with the 3x since the introduction of the XL2. It seems to be hit or miss as to whether one has the problem or not with a particular 3x lens. Is it a lens problem or is it a camera problem?

Does it mean that I should bring my 3x lens to the dealer to try various bodies to find one that is compatible?

Has anyone had any dealings with Canon regarding this problem? If so, what is the official Canon response??

I checked the basic sharpness of he 3x lens and found it to be no less sharp than any of the others I've tested. The sharpness chart is at http://www.pbase.com/image/38413625. But does it have the zoom problem being discussed here? It certainly does! I'm not sure this is just a back focus problem (parallel incoming rays focus at a fixed distance from the back of the lens irrespective of focal length but that point isn't on the CCD plane). I think it's a design problem (rear focal point shifts as focal length of lens is adjusted). Does anyone have a 3x that doesn't exhibit this?

3X Lens & Matte Box
 

Hello all...got a question. I am about to purchase the XL2 and would like to incorporate a matte box along with the 3x wide angle lens. Has anyone used the 3x wide angle lens with a matte box. If so, which matte box? and how does it perform..any vignetting?

We are looking at the Chrozsiel 4X4, Cavision 4X4 and the Formatt FM-500 4X4. Does any one have any of these and what is your experience? Any vignetting when shooting in 16:9?

Thanks in advance

Hello Scott, if no one should respond, you may want to contact James Lee, the technical support manager for 16X9INC. He should be able to tell you which Chrosziel matte box you need for the 3X wide angle lens. 16X9INC is the sole authorized US distributor for Chrosziel, who in turn provides Chrosziel products for B&H Photo, EVS, ZGC, etc.

Contact him at: jamesl@16x9inc.com or 866.800.1699. Of course, any one of our sponsers should be able to help too.

The 411-53 Chrosziel matte box they sell specifically for the XL2 "suits lenses up to 5.2mm or 4.5mm with one filter". I think the 3X may vignette at full wide, but to be sure contact James. Of course, they have other Chrosziel models to choose from, perhaps one better suited for the 3X?

Cinetech on the other hand, offers a full size, four-stage(!) matte box that can accomodate nearly any lens. Additionally, it is a swing-away matte box so you can switch between lenses without having to remove the entire matte box. I'm 95% certain this Cinetech matte box can fit the 3X wide angle lens without problem or vignetting so long as you have the right adapter ring in place. It also has the added benefit of using either 4X5 or 4X4 filters.

This setup will cost you closer to $3000 though so it is not cheap ($500 or so for the Cinetech rods and camera plate, $2400 - $2700 for the matte box depending on where you go, another $100 - $200 or so for the eye brow/french flag). Check out Cinetech for more info.

Not sure about the Cavision or Formatt matte boxes.

Hello Christopher,

Thanks for the reply. I will call those guys at 16X9 and see what they recommend. I am suprised that as many XL2 owners that visit dvinfo, that none has responded to this question. Perhaps most don't use a matte box with the 3x or the 20x. and if that is the case, I wonder why. Perhaps there are problems when using a matte box with the XL2?

Hi

Being a bit of a novice to the XL2, and filmmaking can I ask a question:-
"what is a matt box?"
"under what circumstances would you use on?"

Ta.

I have used the Vocas 2 stage matte box with the 3 x lens with no problem.

I recommend the Vocas as I have found it to be of high quality and very durable. The model I have has two rotating stages on it.

I purchased mine at the Filter Gallery in NYC. The Filter Gallery has a lot of different manufacturers represented there to try out.

Actually, the reason we see so few reports of using the XL2 with a matte box is because matte box manufacturers only just started producing camera plates/rods supports for the XL2.

At least this was the case for Chrosziel who only announced their XL2 rods support just last month and in fact I'm not even sure they're shipping yet (they are however, available now for order).

Whenever a new camera comes out all the matte box manufacturers have to ensure that their existing systems will work as installed or otherwise redesign and machine new parts. This is exactly what happened with the previous Chrosziel XL1s rods support, which was too short for use on the XL2.

The Cinetech base plate also needed to be modified, this time because the XL2 had a slightly wider base. So not necessarily a problem with matte boxes, just that the XL2 is still very new! I only just started seeing new matte boxes for Sony's HDV camcorders as well.

Eric, a matte box is an overpriced product aspiring cinematographers purchase to make their DV camcorders look like film cameras.

Did I say that out loud? Seriously, a matte box is simply a kind of lens hood/sun shade which you attach to the front of your camera lens. However, unlike the simple lens shade that came shipped with your camcorder, matte boxes allow you greater control over the light coming into your camera because:

1) A good matte box has a much larger shade area then a regular lens shade, extending as far out in front of the lens without getting in the shot itself. Matte boxes also frequently come with french flags or eye brows, something akin to placing your hand above your eyes when you're trying to see when its bright outdoors. In fact this is exactly how a matte box works: helps prevent stray light or too much bright light from affecting your camera's vision.

2) A good matte box allows you to use several filters without having to screw them on to the front of your lens. This is accomplished through the use of filter trays, which you can install and remove in seconds. Using multiple filters helps you create different images. Most matte boxes have at least two filter stages, higher-end matte boxes come with four or more! Search the forums on different filters you can use, but most matte boxes allow you to use 4X4 sized filters. Other sizes include 3X3, 4X5.6, or even 6X6. The larger sized filtes are found primarily in motion picture film.

Something else you should know is that matte boxes can be attached directly to the lens (clamp-on) or installed via a camera plate and rods (usually 15mm in thickness). The rods solution is more expensive but will allow you to keep the weight of the matte box and filters off of your lens. Having rods also means you can enjoy the use of a follow focus and other cinema accessories.

So far I've discussed the advantages of having a matte box. Drawbacks include more equipment cost, more equipment to carry and take up space in your bag, and taking more time to setup and install. Larger matte boxes can rarely be left on the camera because they just won't fit in bags made for the camera alone. So this means the matte box needs to be attached before every new shoot (imagine driving to several locations in a day, each time assembling the matte box and rods to the camera). One solution for this is to use a very large bag or case.

If you shoot documentaries or run-and-gun type of footage, a large matte box may not be for you. Besides, they add more weight and can be bulky to shoot with handheld. A matte box is best for controlled filming situations, as on a narrative feature, short, or music video. You will be hard pressed to find a motion picture film camera without a matte box.

Finally, there is some truth to my first, shorter definition of a matte box: they do make your camera look very professional. This can be important if you have the need to impress clients or help actors feel they're in a "better" production.

Check these links for matte box photos:

Cinetech
16X9INC
Cavision
Century Optics
Cinetactics
Petroff

Now I know what a matt box is.
Thanks Christopher, that was a very clear description.

Hey Guys,

I just received my 3x lens and mine does indeed exhibit the faulty focus problem as well. I agree with A.J. that it may be a design problem. I think we should get some kind of list going of 3x lens owners that exhibit this problem so we can contact Canon. I'm starting to think that no 3x lens works perfectly with the XL2.

If the current interchangeable lens system was what Canon was trying to preserve by keeping the 1/3 chip, I would rather have had Canon switch to a 2/3 CCD and get a new line of lenses that work flawlessly.

I guess we're all stuck till now until because the 20x isn't wide enough :(

A few questions just to clarify...

Does this phenomenom occur only in manual focus mode?

If you rehit the focus button on the zoom outs does that correct the focus properly?

Does the focus work properly in autofocus mode?

Hey Jim,

This phenomenon occurs in both manual and auto mode. In 24p mode, the auto focus is painfully slow so it's definitely noticeable. Besides, I'm sure a lot of us don't trust autofocus mode so it will be a problem for us to deal with. When you zoom out in manual mode, the image becomes blurry and if you hit the focus button, the image refocuses. I hope that helps Jim.

How Big is Canon's 3x Zoom?
 

Anybody know the physical dimensions of the lens? B&H don't list it, and if it's on Canon's site, I don't find it. Chris Hurd's roundup of XL lenses doesn't say, either.

Here, I found these specs:

3 5/8" W x 4 5/8" L

Can anybody confirm this? (I'm cutting foam for a flight case and don't have a 3x zoom on hand to measure.)

Checking the instruction manual for this lens (download the PDF from Canon USA), those are the correct dimensions (without the lens hood). I think all XL2 owners should do themselves a favor and download the various PDF lens and accessory manuals that are available at the Canon USA site. Meanwhile I'll try to work in an update to my XL2 Lens Guide to include that info. Thanks for the idea,

Thanks, Chris. For those who can't find it at Canon's website, here's the page.

When I click on the "Download Manuals" link there, a new window opens in my browser, but it's blank. Dunno what's up with that; I've retried several times.

I can't find manuals for any of the lenses and I am currently borrowing the 16x manual from a friend and would love to read the manual.

Can you point me to them please???

Please?????

For some reason there doesn't seem to be a link to the lenses
on the XL2 page. And the XL1S archive page is broken. However,
I saved all the manuals earlier, so I've put up the 16x manual
PDF (as in a manual lens, right?) on my site (temp!):

www.visuar.com/DVi/16m.pdf

Thanks!
I has actually found it already by searching on the Canon site for XL1 and then in the doenloads I found the manuals for the accessories. The mthod to find these was very convoluted so I couldn't post the link as it wouldn't work without going through the 5-6 step process on their site.

Marty

Canon doesn't recommend using the 3x Wide Angle Lens with the XL2?!?!?
 

I was inquiring about the 3x Wide Angle Zoom for an XL2 that I plan on purchasing in 2 weeks from ZGC and Christine replied:

"Regarding the 3x Wide angle lens, I must let you know that Canon doesn't recommend it with the New XL2 cameras.
It was originally designed a few years back for the original XL1. Since then the cameras have improved but the lens
hasn't. You are better off with a Century Precision adapter either the .6x or the .7x. We have been told by Canon they will
not be introducing a new one. "

Has anybody else heard about this? Everything I've been reading on the board states that the lens on the XL2 is superb, aside from the focus problem.

If I go with the Century adaptor, what are my options as far as filters (polarizers, ND, etc.)? Thanks.

On their website where it describes the XL2 under the list of features is a paragraph which says "Within the Canon XL system alone there are four lenses: the new 20x OIS, 16x OIS, 16x Manual, and 3x Wide." If that can't be considered a recommendation I guess I wouldn't know what to call it.

I bought the 3x wide lens a month after I bought the xl2. I hardly take it off now, because I'm doing mostly interviews. It's a great lens, and I'm happy I bought it. ( Don't know anything about the century lens, except that it would make the 20x lens even more front heavy.
Good luck.
Bruce yarock

Past discussions on this forum (check "Search" for X 3 lens) give some indications that there may be a few problems matching the XL2 to the Canon X3 lens - such as not showing the full field of view, and some back-focus problems (I have not tried the combination, so forgive me if I'm wrong on this).

What I can't understand is why Canon have not released a new wide angle lens, or at least an updated version of the X3 lens. Wide angle lenses are a very important part of filming, and it just seems strange that the wide-angle section of the system is weak, compared to the telephoto.

One lens that I'd buy in a heartbeat, would be a true wide angle or X3 manual version lens.

I'm with both Bruce and Tony. I bought the 3x and have been happy using it. On the other hand, expert users have longed for improvements in certain areas, like the much-discussed back-focus issue...no quibbles with creating a market demand for better and better stuff!

The 20x is a wonderful lens, but is simply too long for a lot of purposes. I can't imagine trying to get by without the 3x. Sure, the Century wide angle adaptor is an option. Personally, though, I'd rather use the interchangeable lens architecture of the XL system than put even more heavy layers of glass way out in front of the CCD.

I'm still waiting for an opportunity to put my 20x back on the camera...
Bruce Yarock

Did a REAL Canon representative say that ? Or is it just someone trying to promot Century Optics lenses ?

The original poster , posted a remark, made by a retailer, referencing a coment made to them by Canon.

So the original poster is a third hand account.

<<<-- Originally posted by Richard Alvarez : The original poster , posted a remark, made by a retailer, referencing a coment made to them by Canon.

So the original poster is a third hand account. -->>>

Translation:
"The Canon 3X is currently out of stock....we do have plenty of the Century Wide Angle adapters in stock though"


I have the 3X and we use it as often as the 20X....no problems here...wouldnt live without it in the kit.

I just wanted to add that we used the 3X wide angle lens with the XL2 on a recent shoot and that it performed very well. Although the 16x manual servo is our primary lens, I wouldn't shoot without the 3x.

"Translation:
"The Canon 3X is currently out of stock....we do have plenty of the Century Wide Angle adapters in stock though"


I have the 3X and we use it as often as the 20X....no problems here...wouldnt live without it in the kit."


Greg,

This is not the case. I have had nothing but excellent experiences with ZGC (thank you DVI for the recommendation). I bought my Xl1s last February from Christine and was so satisified that I shot her an email this past week to get a quote for the XL2. Her honesty is refreshing as instead of just giving me the quote for the 3X and pulling in an additional $1200, she relayed information they got from Canon. They do have the 3X in stock and when I mentioned I was a member of this community, I got a discount on the XL2. No complaints here.

Everything I've read here on the board states that the 3X is an excellent lens with the XL2 with the added resolution (with exception to the back focus issue) so I was suprised by Christine's statement. Anybody have any experience with the 3X with the XL2 shooting landscapes? Any frame grabs or footage would be greatly appreciated. Many Thanks.

Kevin

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Janisch : "Anybody have any experience with the 3X with the XL2 shooting landscapes? Any frame grabs or footage would be greatly appreciated. -->>>

Kevin, like many others, I was surprised about your comment. I've been shooting landscapes with the 3X lens and XL2 and been very satisfied with the result. Some time ago I posted one frame taken with 3X & XL2 to www.koillismaa.fi/~lkettune. If needed, can add footages as well, but really don't recognize a real problem with the XL2 and 3X lens.

I would also be bit surprised, if Canon came out with a new 3X lens, for the reason that the next XLx is not going to be a SD format camera, and, in my understanding, they will have to design new lenses for the HDV format cameras. Thus, it's difficult to conceive they produced a new 3X lens only for the XL2 markets. (Of course, what Canon will do, does not depend on my speculation.)

Lauri,

I was suprised as well. Thank you so much for the frame.

3X ND strength?
 

Hi;

Can anyone tell me the strength of the 3X wide angle's internal ND?

Olly