DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Canon XL and GL Series DV Camcorders (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-gl-series-dv-camcorders/)
-   -   Wide Angle Adaptor (20X Lens) (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-gl-series-dv-camcorders/36684-wide-angle-adaptor-20x-lens.html)

Richard Hunter December 20th, 2004 07:50 PM

Wide Angle Adaptor (20X Lens)
I see that Century Optics have released the 0.7X converter for the 20X lens on the XL2. This looks ideal for me, as I find the 20X to be not wide enough most of the time.

However, I live in Singapore, and the local Century distributor does not carry this converter in stock. They will order it for me, but this means I can't try it out before deciding whether to buy it or not.

So, my question is, is anyone using this adaptor (VS-07CV-XL2) with their XL2, and if so, can you please let me know what you think of it?


Richard Hunter

Bill Turner December 20th, 2004 10:48 PM

Hopefully you will get some response, but the camera and the unit are both relatively new. The .7x was originally designed for the 16X auto focus lens on the XL1. The 20X lens on the XL2 is extremely similar (5.4mm efl vs 5.5mm efl at the wide end)

We tested the .7x converter on the XL2 and aside from changing the spacing between the rear element of the converter and the front element of the 20X (it is more convex and they touched) the results are the same as on the 16X - which is to say excellent.

I do not blame you for wanting to try it out, and wouldn't blame you for taking my statements with a grain of salt since I work for Century.

We do not have an exclusive agent in Singapore and if the agent you are speaking to will not give you a return option you could order direct from us, but if you returned it only the purchase price and not the shipping charges both directions would be refundable. We have a "bullet proof" 30 day return policy on items we sell direct, but dealers are free to both discount and set their own policy on returns/ exchanges/ and refunds.

our website is www.centuryoptics.com

good luck

Richard Hunter December 20th, 2004 11:30 PM

Thanks a lot for the reply Bill. Yes I would prefer to try it out on my camera first. Of course I fully accept what you say, and certainly don't want any grains of salt (or sand) near my lens! :)

I think I will wait for a while to see if there is any response from the XL2 users on the forum. I will also send a mail to Century to find out the list price and shipping cost for the converter (the current list on the Century website does not have this unit inside).


Richard Hunter December 21st, 2004 06:22 PM

I tried to get a price from Century Optics, but they do not ship to Singapore. So any user feedback on this adaptor would be most welcome.


Rob Lohman December 22nd, 2004 05:41 AM

Richard: don't expect any (yet). The camera is new and this
adaptor is even newer. I doubt anyone here has yet seen and/or
tried it yet. Sorry.

Richard Hunter December 22nd, 2004 06:20 PM

Hi Rob. Century say that it is back-ordered with a 3-4 week waiting time. I presume someone is buying them? Anyway, I don't have much choice, so will be patient for a while.


Marty Hudzik December 22nd, 2004 09:10 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Lohman : Richard: don't expect any (yet). The camera is new and this
adaptor is even newer. I doubt anyone here has yet seen and/or
tried it yet. Sorry. -->>>

Au contraire, mon frère (spelling???)

I recently got my hands on one of these adapters and so far it rocks. I have been using the Century .6x adapter that is partial zoom through and cannot tell you how much better the .7x seems to be. Zooming all the way through is a pleasure and it holds focus through the entire range. I am in heaven again. Having used a DVX for the last 2 years I am addicted to a wide field of view and this delivers.

The only bad thing is it weighs a lot. Now bear in mind I have no trouble at all handling the Xl2. I actually like the weight and mass of this thing as it stabilizes a lot of my shots. But the shift in weight toward the front when the .7x is on the lens is massive. I now find myself trying to rig some type of counterweight to the back assembly to try to balance the unit.

IF you have any specific questions I can answer them the best that I can. I have just been using it for 2 days so it is still early. I can say that so far when I zoom in on subjects I do not feel as if I am missing anything....meaning I don't really notice the lack of telephoto compared to the 20x. I can still zoom in damn close to whatever I want and don't find myself wanting "more". This may not be the case if I was doing wildlife films but then I guess this is not the lens for that.

In my opinion the range this lens has is the "lens" that Canon should have shipped with the XL2. 35mm equivalent of 29mm-580mm is a very usable range.

Richard Hunter December 22nd, 2004 09:30 PM

Hi Marty. Thanks a lot for your comments. You have already covered most of my questions, I only have one concern left.

How easy is it to fit and remove this adaptor? I never used the XL1 and have no experience with the Canon bayonet mount. I am pretty careful so don't expect to break anything, but do you think there will be an issue with wear and tear if I remove and refit the adaptor very often?

Thanks again,


Marty Hudzik December 22nd, 2004 10:57 PM

The unit goes on and off with ease. The biggest issue will be what to do with it if you are in a run and gun situation because the front and back element are exposed when you take it off. You can easily throw the included len caps on but that requires you to put the cam down. It's doable but a pain if you are in a hurry. I think once you have it on you will not want to take it off. IMHO

I don't think there will be much wear and tear either. The only issue I encountered in 3 years of using the .6x adapter on the XL1 was that the black paint began to wear off of the tabs on the lens where the hood or lens adapter slides on. Very similar to the wear you see on a black accessorie shoe once you have moved and removed items dozens of times. However when the Canon lenshood is put back on you can't see it.

My intention is to leave it on all of the time and not remove it unless I find myself in a unique scenario that requires the full 840mm zoom.

As I said I have been using the .6x for years and to have to take it off every time I want to do even a medium zoom just stinks! I am tired of taking it on and off. The range I get with the .7x WA and 20x zoom is perfect.

Now if I can just get the camera balanced again!


Richard Hunter December 23rd, 2004 01:50 AM

Hi Marty. Sounds great, thanks a lot for your inputs. I will probably order one soon and worry about the unbalanced weight when my wrist starts to creak too much!


Rob Lohman December 23rd, 2004 05:22 AM

Great to hear we have someone here with that combination Marty!
Thanks for your reply!! (and putting me back on my spot, hehe <g>)

Marty Hudzik December 27th, 2004 10:54 AM

hold the presses!
Okay. While I initially raved about the .7x adapter I have some new data regarding using it in a real world environment. Over Christmas I used the XL2 and the .7x adapter for filming a family gathering. I ran into major focusing issues. I was constantly checking focus as I was never sure of myself. The image seemed soft in the viewfinder and I could never get it just right. Also....I saw major lens flares......I know this happens with WA adapters but they seemed a but excessive to me. This is all based on my "LCD" viewing. I came away from the event feeling unsure about a large number of shots. But I used the "zoom in, focus, zoon out" technique to ensure most of it was sharp.

Well upon viewing I find out almost none of the footage is sharp. Infact it is all very soft. Even in the rare event that I was properly focused it looked softer that the XL2 alone. Also...it did not hold the focus on the "zoon-focus-zoom out" shots. I am clearly in focus and when I zoom out it goes soft.....just a little but clearly soft. I was not able to see this softness in the LCD. Also....in several shots there are objects on the perimeter of the frame that are blurred.....even when the subject in the center is focused. In addition there appears to be a ghost like softening effect whenever there is a light source in the shot. Almost like a diffusion or as if there is condensation on the lens.

I am in the process of troubleshooting to see if I did something wrong but I can't imagine what that is at this point. I have become very proficient at using the XL2 over the last 4 months and no longer have any focusing issues with just the stock lens. I have adapted and can work it flawlessly and almost never have an out of focus shot. This just seems too weird!

Can anyone comment on their experiences with the Century adapters? Even with the XL1? I just can't believe that this level of softness is acceptable.

( At this point I am not saying this adapter is bad! I am saying that my first experience with it is bad! It may turn out to be something I did wrong or it may turn out to be a legit problem. I am trying to get other users input so that I can determine where the problem lays. Thanks!)

Richard Hunter December 27th, 2004 06:28 PM

Hi Marty. Thanks for the feedback, I'm sorry your shots did not turn out too well. Let's hope for an informative reply from Bill Turner that explains how to avoid this soft focus effect.

Do you know what your aperure settings were during the shooting? I've read elsewhere that the XL2 has soft focus problems with small apertures and of course there is limited depth of field at wide apertures. Just wondering.


Marty Hudzik December 28th, 2004 11:43 AM

I have discovered that with this adapter there is a "backfocus like" problem. When I zoom in and focus and then pull back out the image goes very soft. SOmetimes it is blatantly out of focus and other times just a little. It can be hard to detect on the tiny LCD/VF of the XL2. Over time I have gotten used to zooming, tight critical focus on details, zoom out and trust the lens to stay in focus. But with the .7x adapter you can throw that out the window.

I did some tests and I am posting them for you all to review. They are simple. I zoomed in on ornamants on my Xmas tree, focused and then slowly zoomed out. With the WA adapter I can see the image going soft. If you watch you will see me pause the zoom, tweak the focus, then continue the zoom. It then starts getting out of focus again. I repeated this multiple times and it is totally reproducable.

I then tried the same with just the 20x lens and it stays very sharp all the way to full wide. There may be a minor softening at the widest but it still looks in focus. Just not as razor sharp.

This is with the camera on manual focus, 24PA, Iris wide open, +3db gain.

The ammount that the .7x adapter goes out is consistent. I could feasibly slowly move the focus wheel at a proportinal speed to how fast I am zooming out and keep focus that way except the servo design of the XL2 lens does not allow for simultaneous focus and zoom! So that is out of the question.

I guess at this point I would like to hear from anyone that has used the .7x in the past with the XL1, DVX etc. IS this normal? Should the lens maintain focus through the range without having to adjust constantly?

I think this combination is doable if you can live with this flaw. You can focus it manually all over the entire range. BUt if you zoom of change anything you need to refocus a lot. And with the XL2 small LCD it is even harder to tell critical focus when you are in a wide FOV. It is too hard to see the details of the image when they are that small. The normal workaround is to zoom and focus and then zoom back out. But as I pointed out that is not possible with this setup. Unless there is a defect with this particular lens.

Anyway here is the url for the sample clip:


download and rename the .wmvx to .wmv to play it.

Richard Hunter December 28th, 2004 06:35 PM

Hi Marty. I downloaded your clip. This effect looks pretty nasty to me, and I don't think I could live with it.

Another question - I don't know if this is even possible (or relevant), but is there a UV filter or similar on the 20X lens while the converter is attached?

Bill Turner - any comments please?


Marty Hudzik December 28th, 2004 06:54 PM

There is not UV filter attached. IT is possible to mount one 4inch round filter in the Lens/sunshade but that is an odd size and I don;t have any!

Why are you asking? Do you think the footage with the WA adapter on it looks darker? Cause I have wondered if I am losing light through it.

Anyone else?

Richard Hunter December 28th, 2004 07:54 PM

Hi Marty. That's not why I was asking, but now that you mention it, the reds (on the Santa) with converter seem a little bit muted compared with those without.

What prompted my question was I was just wondering if there was something out of the ordinary that you could be doing that might affect the focus. Clutching at straws, really. :)


Christopher Go December 29th, 2004 08:13 AM

I think it's a good idea to email Century Optics with your findings or try posting this in the DVXUser forums as well since that may improve the chances Bill can see this. I'm very curious as to why this happens, and am wondering if I shouldn't just get the Canon 3X wide angle instead. Also, does this happen with the manual lenses on the XL2?

Thanks for the updates, Marty, appreciate the clip.

As for things to try, is OIS turned off?

Marty Hudzik December 29th, 2004 09:03 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Christopher Go : I think it's a good idea to email Century Optics with your findings or try posting this in the DVXUser forums as well since that may improve the chances Bill can see this. I'm very curious as to why this happens, and am wondering if I shouldn't just get the Canon 3X wide angle instead. Also, does this happen with the manual lenses on the XL2?

Thanks for the updates, Marty, appreciate the clip.

As for things to try, is OIS turned off? -->>>

I have tried OIS on and off and it is the same. As far as the manual lens doing this, I don't actually know as I don't have it.

I don;t yet know if this is normal or if it is the way these particular wide angle adapters react. It might be a limitation of the converter itself or maybe it is out of spec? I really don;t know for sure.

I was hoping to get some input form fellow DVinfo members who have used it on the XL1 to see if they had this issue.

Bill Turner January 3rd, 2005 01:18 PM

Here is the reply I sent privately a few days agoin response to an email received at the office. While I understand why at first blush the converter would seem to be the culprit, it is very unlikely.

My response:

First of all I am sorry I was unable to respond sooner, I have been using up some excess vacation as the year ends.

Please bear with me, because it is extremely unlikely that there is anything wrong with your .7X converter.

We would be happy to inspect and test your unit if you send it to us.

We have a Canon XL2 with the 20X lens here. I have personally evaluated the .7x on this lens. The lens is very similar to its predecessor the 16X. We have sold thousands of these for use on the Canon XL1 and the Panasonic DVX-- with very few complaints or problems, so while I will not say it is impossible that the unit is defective the problem you describe does not seem consistant with a problem in the converter.

If you achieve sharp focus at maximum telephoto and the image goes soft as you zoom wider the zoom lens itself is the likely problem. The .7x effectively reduces the focal length of the zoom. Depth of focus, the area of acceptable sharpness on either side of optimum focus (forgive me if you know this-- it is sort of like depth of field but at the image plane instead of the object plane) gets smaller and smaller as the focal length becomes shorter.

This can mean that if your lens has a slight backfocus problem, or the zoom curve is almost out of spec, it might seem ok (tho you say you are seeing "something" in the lens alone) but be unacceptably soft with the .7X in place.

If you zoom in auto focus mode does the lens remain sharp?

The converter contains no moving or focusing elements, and once you focus thru it and achieve sharp focus it should not change as you zoom wide--- unless the problem is in the lens.

The most critical test of the quality of the converter is typically at telephoto. The converter does have some lateral chromatic at wide angle and as is typical in converters (and the lens itself) is not as sharp at the edge of the field as it is in the center-- but is still very good.

Please email me and let me know what you would like to do next. If you bought the camera from a local store I would see if they would allow you to try the .7X on a different camera, or put a different lens on your camera and see if problem persisits.

It will be most noticeable when the lens is near wide open. Stopping the lens down increases the depth of focus.

Best Regards

Bill Turner
Century Division
Schneider Optics

Marty Hudzik January 3rd, 2005 01:23 PM

I sent you an email response directly.


Jordell Jarnell January 26th, 2005 01:37 PM

Hello Marty et. al. Thank you all for the work done re the .7x. For us, the .7x + 20x as a "standard" setup would work very well so we were interested in the outcome of the work done in resolving this concern. Please let us know, TIA.

Marty Hudzik January 26th, 2005 02:03 PM

Here is a link to the images I sent to Bill Turner.


As of last week he was taking the Xl2 they have at Century and testing it thoroughly with the .7x adapter to see if they have these issues. I have tried 2 different .7x adapters and the results are the same.

It seems that I can work around this annomaly with a careful use of good lights and a fstop around 4-5. A field monitor is almost necessary because if you are just a tiny bit out of focus in the center the edges seem to really blur. And you really can't see it in the viewfinder.

The problem with this is I bought the .7x for run and gun stuff where I am not ina controlled studio environment. I already had the .6x but hated taking it on and off. The .7x was supposed to make life easier but instead has been a much pain in the butt! I can get good shots with it but there is an exponentail increase in out of focus and blurry shots with it. I am better of not using it or switiching to the .6x until I here from Bill about his findings. His comment to me was that they have sold a lot of these adapters and in all honesty if there was a problem he would think he would be hearing it from all over. So we will see.


Richard Hunter February 1st, 2005 02:43 AM

In case anyone is still interested in the 0.7X converter, I got to test one out today at my local dealer, using a 14" Sony production monitor to check the focus sharpness. Based on Marty's valuable feedback, I set the aperture wide open to make any focus drift more obvious.

Anyway, I could not see any focus shift with the converter fitted. For what it's worth, I also tried a slow zoom on auto focus and the image stayed sharp over the whole range.

If anybody has a reason NOT to buy this converter, please don't post it here, because it's too late for me! :)


Marty Hudzik February 1st, 2005 08:24 AM

On auto focus the adapter works ok as the camera constantly refocuses electronically as you zoom out. Therefore the camera adjusts if the focus were to drift. If you use autofocus that is fine. I almost never do and never had to with my xl1. Again the 20x lens by itself is doing fine.

What I notice more than anything is that the focus on the outer rim of the lens on the .7x is very touchy. If you have the center of the image focused exactly and not even off by a fraction the image tends to look good. However if you were off by the tiniest bit (almost undetectable by the human eye) then the focus falls off sharply as you look to the edges of the frame.

Where I am having the biggest problem is if I am shooting a person 20 feet away, I zoom in, set the focus and it looks dead on. I zoom out to frame the shot based on that and the focus will drift just a hair in the center of the lens. In the viewfinder it still looks crystal clear. What I can't see in the viewfinder is that the edges are now going soft. If I have a field monitor and focus based on the new wide angle I can get a sharp picture across the frame. But if I change the zoom I am almost guarenteed to have a soft focus in the frame.

I have not given up on this adapter but I have not heard back from Century about their "checking to see if they can reproduce the problem" and Canon has sent back my XL2 saying the lens is in spec. So at the moment I have a near unusable combination. If I had the luxury of setting up a field monitor and double checking every single shot to make sure that the focus is perffect I would have the time to switch the 20x lens and the .6x century adapter that does not zoom through, based on that particular shots focal needs. But I don't have that luxury and the .7x was supposed to make life easier. It hasn't.

The final statement I can make regarding this is this. I have used the Xl1, dvx100 and now the Xl2. I have never had problem focusing in manual mode and always have had good results based strictly on using the Viewfinder. For whatever reason when I add the .7x adapter onto the XL2, I find later, after a shoot, that a large ammount of the images are soft. Not only that but a large ammount look in focus in the center and have edges that look like they are blurred using a filter. It is annoying to say the least. This sample below shows you what I see a lot. I shot all of these by zooming onto the far wall, focusing, then zooming out. See what I am seeing here?


Bill Turner February 1st, 2005 05:33 PM

Last week I checked a .7X Century Wide Angle Converter taken at random from inventory. I used our own Canon XL2 and 20x lens that was purchased from a dealer from random stock.

I found that it held focus thru the range, both in manual and auto modes. I performed the tests wide open and examined the live images on a Sony 19" monitor in underscan.

While some loss of edge sharpness and increased chromatic abberation was visible at the edges at the widest angle, I saw nothing as pronounced as what appears in the samples.

I am at a loss to explain the problem, other than re- iterate that there are no moving parts in the converter and that having the image drift in and out of focus when using the converter can not be due to a defect in the converter.

As mentioned previously, it is conceivable that because the shorter focal length resulting with the converter has a smaller margin for error in back focus, that a back focus error in the zoom that is not noticeble (or at least objectionable) in the lens alone might become a problem when the converter is added.

Other than examining this particular example on the off chance that something is loose - tho I am not sure this could cause the problem either- I am at a loss to explain the problem being experienced.

As I have also said, we have sold several thousand of these converters configured for various cameras and have had very few complaints or dis-satisfied customers, if a basic flaw in the design and function of the unit existed we should have been made aware of it long ago and had many many complaints-- and we have not.

Bill Turner
Century Division
Schneider Optics

Marty Hudzik February 1st, 2005 08:59 PM

Well that is quite depressing to say the least. I am stuck with a 20x lens that doesn't want to play nice with the .7x adapter. I have had 2 .7x adapters and the results were the same on both units so I am inclined to believe that there is not anything wrong with the adapter itself. But if Canon claims that the lens is within spec what can I do?

I would like to know if the .7x adapters vary through the years. I am currently using a .7x "value" series adapter that was modifed by century to fit the Xl2. I also bought a brand new .7x for the Xl2 and it says "pro series" on the casing. IS there any difference there? Because I sent back the brand new one since the optical quality is supposed to be the same on both.

Canon is surely not going to replace my 20x lens when they say it is in spec to begin with.

So while others may be having luck I am left out in the cold on this one. I will be borrowing a 16x ISII XL1s lens to test it on in a few weeks.

Seriously bummed here in Ohio


Mark Sasahara February 1st, 2005 10:52 PM

Marty, I think that the problem is with the 20x lens. If you zoom in get critical focus and then zoom out, the lens' focus point will shift. It has nothing to do with the converter. Try it without the converter, it will shift.

Because the lens is driven by electric brushes and not really mechanically, you will lose your focus point. EF is fine if your a stills photog, but for video, you absolutely need to be able to zoom and not have your focus mark move. You should buy the manual lens.

I'm not sure what kind of crack the design team was smoking, but I think the 20x lens blows.

This isn't a backfocus issue.

I posted my findings about a week ago about critical focus with the 20x auto lens.

Richard Hunter February 2nd, 2005 01:04 AM

Mark, the focus does not necessarily shift when zooming, or at least, it shouldn't shift by an objectionable amount. I think this is a problem with how Marty's lens is adjusted rather than the basic design. Otherwise everybody would be seeing it too. I think your own tests are somewhat special because the follow-focus mechanism is probably not intended to be used with a servo-focus lens.


Mark Sasahara February 2nd, 2005 01:26 AM

I was skimming the threads so I may have missed something. There is a follow focus gear for the 20x lens, I've got one. Hand focusing makes it worse. I have used the .7 W/A converter on my 20x with no problem. I was in manual focus.

Marty Hudzik February 2nd, 2005 02:40 PM

Here are a few more images that confirm something isn't right. I went through the trouble of setting up a tripod and using a 17" production monitor to check focusing. I set the gain to -3 so that I could have the iris wide open through the range. I zoomed in to a sign on the far wall and set critical focus. I then zoomed out to a preset point that both the 20x and WA could fit into the frame. I did not touch the focus after initially focusing on the sign.

Right Click and save as:


Tests were performed under the exact same conditions. Nothing was changed from shot to shot except for the WA adapter was placed on the lens. There is even a slight shift in color when the WA is on the unit. Note the electrical cord hanging from the ceiling on the left side of the shot. It is quite blurry with the WA adapter.

Also understand that none of these anomalies are visible through the viewfinder...it just doesn't resolve enough to see this.

I am about to send my lens and camera back to canon to have them inspect it again and maybe this time reset the backfocus properly. But this just seems downright screwy! And I hate to be a whiner.....but why do I always get stuck with the equipment that doesn't work quite right and then have to jump through hoops just to get it to do what everyone else is getting right the first time? It must be karma or something because every camera I have purchased has had something weird wrong with it. Just something slight that screws up image quality or audio and I have to deal with the manufacturer and practically beat them just to realize there is a problem.

Oh well. If anyone sees these and can shed some light on the issues please do.


Marty Hudzik February 2nd, 2005 10:03 PM

OK. NOw I guess I would like to ask the few of you who have the Xl2, 20x and .7x adapter to post a few grabs like I have using the same basic parameters. Iris wide open, zoom in on distant subject, focus, zoom out....capture frame. Then repeat with the wide angle lens on. I am getting really poor results as you have seen in my screen grabs. I have been trying to convince myself that it is something I am doing wrong but I can't find the problem.

If I could see a few grabs showing much better results than mine I would be encourage that this is fixable. I understand that there is going to be a slight loss in qulaity anytime you put extra galss in front of the lens. But what I am seeing is unacceptable. I am hoping one of you can inspire me that indeed this .7x and 20x dilemma might still work for me.

Thanks in advance and I really hope someone can step up and ease my tired weary mind!!!

Richard Hunter February 9th, 2005 08:47 PM

XL2 20X lens With 0.7X Converter

Hi Marty. Sorry to take so long to get these. not sure if they tell you much except that my editing room lighting is no good for shooting video. The first 2 are shot in 25p, the other 2 are 50i. I didn't deinterlace or anything else.

In 2 of the shots you can see the 0.7X converter on top of a speaker. This is a check on whether I labelled the shots correctly.

You can't tell by zooming in, but all the shots were focussed on the Viewsonic logo at the bottom of the right-hand LCD monitor.



Rob Lohman February 10th, 2005 05:13 AM

Richard: I have added your new thread to the old one. Did you
get a specific error message when replying?

Thanks for the grabs!

Richard Hunter February 10th, 2005 05:20 AM

Hi Rob, thanks. The message was specific, but I forget the exact wording. it was something about my reply not being related to any particular thread.

Edit: Anyway, I've just managed to reply to your post, so at the moment there is no problem. :)


Marty Hudzik February 10th, 2005 08:09 AM

Are these shot in 16x9 mode or 4x3? The aspect that it is showing is square pixels but I am wondering if I should stretch it to get the true image. Nevermind. I stretched it and got the proper aspect. Images don't look too bad. I still see some distortion (barrel) and I see some chromatic abberations toward the edges. It is a lot better than my .7x for sure. I am assuming that you were almost wide open iris on these shots to get proper exposure? Thanks again.


Richard Hunter February 10th, 2005 09:11 AM

Hi Marty. They are 4:3. Yes the iris was very close to fully open. Do you see how the 50i shots are sharper than the 25p ones? I had Vertical Detail set to Normal for all of these shots, so I think the comparison is fair. It shows what I had felt through usage to be the case - switching to 25p produces softer images. I'm not sure why that should be so and I would love to hear from someone who can explain that.

As a matter of interest, were your sample shots taken in p or i mode, and have you compared the results in both modes?


Marty Hudzik February 10th, 2005 09:47 AM

I shot in 24P for my tests. I can try shooting interlaced to compare sharpness. Could you try shooting a few in 16x9? It occurred to me that most of the softness I see is on the outer edges....but mostly left and right. I don't have my camera with me but when I look at my images on the PC I can clearly see that if I cropped my 16x9 to 4x3 most of the chromatic shift and softness is gone. Based on the way the CCD is sampled from the middle of the CCD to create the 4x3 in camera this should be a similar process to what happens in camera. What I am wondering is if you can go to 16x9 and see if the ammount of blur or chromatic abberation increases out on the edges in the area that you could not see in 4x3? Essentially you will be capturing more of the light that is bent on the outer edges of the adapter when in 16x9. Possibly 4x3 is masking this area and that is why I am the only one seeing issues as of yet.

Century Optics confirmed that they are not seeing the issues I have had with the adapter when they tested one of their .7x in house on their XL2. However they do mention that the adapter has a bit of a fall off and chromatic shift at the edges that is consistent with glass in this price range (but don;t see it to the extent as in my samples). They do not mention directly wether they tested in 16x9 or not so it is possible that the 4x3 mode is "looking" through the best part of the glass and not seeing the part that I am seeing. At least in theory.

Maybe in time I will get to the bottom of this. I am trying out a Canon 3x wide and honestly I am leaning toward that now unless a solution is found for my problem.


Richard Hunter February 10th, 2005 05:56 PM

Hi Marty. I'll try 16:9, but it won't be soon because I'm working overseas for a couple of weeks. I'll do it when I get back.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:26 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2021 The Digital Video Information Network