Not a good wide standard XL2 Factory lens!!!
 

I was surprised with the standard lens on the XL2, the point of it not being that wide angled. Compared to my small Panasonic 3CCD DX110, it looks so zoomed in!!!! Does anyone have any recommendations for another lens I could use, but no the 3X wide angle lens.

I nearly have my XL2 set-up completes, with mattebox, radio mic and pro tripod now!! I must admit it does look the part!!! hehe

I'm curious. What's wrong with Canon's 3x wide angle lens?

This is the whole idea of having a camera with interchangeable lenses. We call it "flexibility." With these two lenses, an XL2 operator can cover a whole lot more ground than anyone with a single lens camera.

Jay

...
 

Nothing really. Just wud prefer a lens with more zoom AND wider angle.

A

Well, from your point of view (no pun intended), your options are limited.

Jay

cheers lol - good pun too!!!

From what your wants sound like, your best bet is probably a wide converter for the 20x. Then you can have a decent wide angle and if you really need to drill in close on something, you can pop the converter off.

Personally, if I could buy it all again I'd go with the 3x lens. My Century 0.7x might as well be welded onto the 20x OIS. Being able to zoom in to 20x is great, I just rarely need to.

Oh yeah, there are umpteen reviews on wide converters in this forum, heh. But having a single lens with the wide characteristics and 20x zoom is going to be expensive. Also note that a true zoom-though converter is going to add a good pound of glass and metal to the front-heavy XL2.

thanks jeff

Remember that when you add glass in front of your current lens you will take a sharpness hit. I use the really high quality .7x from Century and the image does soften a little. Not a big deal since the XL2 is so sharp and clean anyway. But when you zoom in far, and you have areas of high contrast, the lens will show chromatic abberation. After all, its' bending the light to achieve a wider field of view and that can cause anomalies. In some shots it is un-noticable and in others you can see it.

You need to balance what is important to you personally. If absolute clarity is then the 3x lens is a better fit. If flexiblity in one lens is more important then the CO adapter should be fine.

great advice thank u :)

I wonder how this HD-FXR180 will look when fitted in front of the our 20X lens.

hey guys i havent shot with the 3x lens but i have heard that the quality of the image using the 3x lens is greatly reduced. They say the lens was designed for the xl1 and for some reason it doesnt work as well with the xl2. it will still give you a wider view just it doesnt deliver the full xl2 quality. i would like to see some frame grabs from the 3x, 16x and 20x side by side. if anyone has some please post a link.

100% false... I shoot with the 3X all the time on my XL2's and never had any problems. The image is not reduced at all and it is noticeably better than any adapter (the Century ones are the best). Whoever told you that the 3X reduces quality either has never used it or has a broken 3X. A few people have reported back-focus issues but I have never seen anyone say anything about a reduction in image quality and surely not "greatly reduced."



ash =o)

I wish I knew firsthand (ie own a 3x :) but I agree with Ash. This has been gone over before

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=49035
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=48768
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=35163

Don't feel bummed out, that misinformation ran pretty deep. I originally heard it from one of the sponsers, but nowadays I think it's a farce.

hey ash ya i wasnt sure about it when i heard that either since it is a canon lens and it is constanty talked good about. but if you have any footage from it and good post it that would be sweet because ive been looking into the 3x or the 16x and i was shyed away from the 3x when i heard that but if you have some footage or something you could send that would be awesome. they could have been talking about the back focusing problem and i just understood wrong.

yes that is who i heard it from, one of the sponsors so i fiugred they knew.

Check this out Mike:

http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxl2/artic...icle10.php#xl3

ash =o)

I agree with Ash that the 3x wide lens is awsome and delivers a better image than all of the adapters. I wouldn't call the concerns over back focus a "farce" as I witnessed it personally on my XL2 with 2 different 3x lenses. But I do think it is greatly exaggerated. This lens delivers an amazing image. The glass is top notch. I don't think you can wrong with it.

Its now for 7 years I`ve used the XL1 with his 16x lens, the use of wide with
this lens was not good but just enough, I made a lot of shots on music partys
so the range from the 16x lens was accepteble.
Now I`ve the XL2 with the 20x lens and I must say I was a little bit `shocked` when I use this lens in wide, it is almost not possible to get
the people totally on the picture, mostly it isn`t possible to go more backwards, this is a real problem.
The 3x lens isn`t a solution, I need a zoom option to 12X, changing a lens
in those situations is not done, than I must change every 5 minutes the lens.

I realy don`t understand why Canons standard lens isn`t standard.

A lens with the good range isn`t avaible, a 0.7 adaptor maybe but cost
quality, money(lot) and more heavy.
So ?!

The 20x is a superb device. I wouldn't want a 2 in one solution for this fantastic peice of optics. As for the 3X with the XL2, the image is softer at most all apertures. The form factor does make it worth the money as opposed to thread on bulk at the front of the 20x.

Unless you zoom in and close the aperture you will not notice much softeness on the 3X. If you are outdoors, use ND filters to control the light....


ash =o)

3X wide vs 0.7 Century
 

A Canon rep told me the 3X wide does suffer from chromatic abberation and recommended an add on wide angle adaptor. This occured at the Videomaker Expo in New Jersey last week. Any thoughts or experiences appreciated.

I have a 3x lens (2nd one, my first one died due to me blowing a fuse, idiot, and the store replaced it for me rather than a costly repair).... anyhoo, I love the lens. Wish it had 2 steps of ND, but other than that, awsome.

Hmmmm....
The rep must have special knowledge that we were not aware of... Seems like the Sony optics are the worst offender for C/A.
I find it odd that a Canon rep would contradict the very reason for being with regard to the only lens switchable cam in it's class.

Welcome to DV Info Net, Richard, and I must say that this is a pretty bold statement for your very first post. Canon's USA video division relies on a substantial amount of outside help at trade shows such as VideoMaker. Most likely you were not talking to a "rep" at all but one of the independant consultants (who are not Canon employees) that work those shows. I've done many such Expos for Canon and other manufacturers myself. Quite possibly you either misheard this person, or they made a misinformed remark, because the 3x wide angle lens does not suffer from chromatic abberation. It doesn't have the long focal length required to see chromatic abberation. The "softness" of the 3x lens is simply the Pixel Averaging phenomenon which has been discussed here before, and is common in standard definition DV at very wide angles. Hope this helps,

That "rep" was most likely not a "rep" at all but an outside trade show consultant, see my post above.