|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 6th, 2004, 05:39 PM | #1 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 30
|
difference between xl2 with manual lens and eos adapter
Hi. I was wondering if anyone had experience with the qualitative difference between a canon with the manual lens (16x for instance) or using the eos adaptor and 35mm lenses. will the image quality differ between the two options?
This is purely a question that addresses quality of image not magnification or wide angle, etc. Thanks
__________________
-- elimae.com : deronbauman.com : lighwell.org |
October 6th, 2004, 09:37 PM | #2 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
Well, there is no wide-angle whatsoever with an EF lens on an XL2. As far as "quality," if the EF lens is an L-series (containing flourite elements), then yes it's better. But the focal length determines whether or not you'll actually use it for any practical purpose, so the issue is moot... since all EF lenses, no matter how wide, become extreme telephoto on the XL2. The XL 16x manual lens delivers excellent quality and a highly utilitarian range of focal length. EF lenses with the adapter are pretty much limited to surveillance and wildlife applications and not much else.
|
October 6th, 2004, 09:42 PM | #3 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 30
|
So, as a film maker, one would probably stick to the 16x or the wide angle lens built for the xl2 and stay away from the adapter and 35mm lenses?
__________________
-- elimae.com : deronbauman.com : lighwell.org |
October 6th, 2004, 10:31 PM | #4 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
The EOS adapter and 35mm still photo lenses, no, not very useful for a filmmaker. The Mini35 adapter and 35mm motion picture lenses, however... *very* useful for a filmmaker.
|
October 6th, 2004, 11:38 PM | #5 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 30
|
Yes, but a difference of many thousands of dollars, right?
__________________
-- elimae.com : deronbauman.com : lighwell.org |
October 7th, 2004, 12:07 AM | #6 |
Warden
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Clearwater, FL
Posts: 8,287
|
If you want to produce nature or wildlife documentaries the EF adapter and EOS lenses are great. But for almost any other application, it's useless.
__________________
Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors |
October 7th, 2004, 03:51 AM | #7 |
RED Code Chef
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
|
Deron: yes, the mini35 adapter itself is $10,000 and that is without
any lens etc. Ofcourse it is available (in a few select places) for rent as well.
__________________
Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge | Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors |
October 11th, 2004, 01:38 AM | #8 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 30
|
Okay, does anyone have an opinion about the qualitative difference between the 16x manual and the 20x that comes with the xl2?
__________________
-- elimae.com : deronbauman.com : lighwell.org |
October 11th, 2004, 03:17 AM | #9 |
RED Code Chef
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
|
They are both high quality lenses, just with a different feature set.
__________________
Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge | Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors |
October 11th, 2004, 11:49 AM | #10 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 30
|
Does either provide a wider image?
__________________
-- elimae.com : deronbauman.com : lighwell.org |
October 14th, 2004, 05:03 AM | #11 |
RED Code Chef
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
|
As you can see in our XL2 lens guide, the 20x is slightly wider
than the 16x manual.
__________________
Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge | Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors |
October 18th, 2004, 02:31 PM | #12 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Quito - Ecuador
Posts: 28
|
I have been experimenting a lot with the 20X, the 16X manual and recently with a borrowed 3x wide angle.
The 20X can do pretty much what the 16X can. I have been able to reproduce with the 20X almost anything I can do with the 16X. As it was mentioned before, the 20X is a little wider than the 16X, but the 3X is the champ, and after my personal tests I have decided to buy the 3X and not the 16, maybe later, when the budget allows. my 2 cents. Sebastian |
October 18th, 2004, 02:48 PM | #13 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 30
|
Thanks. That helps a lot. I was wondering about the 3x as well.
__________________
-- elimae.com : deronbauman.com : lighwell.org |
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|