XL2 and EF Lens Adapter / EF Lenses / EOS Lens

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

400mm f/5.6; 400mm f/4; 400mm f/3.5; 400mm f/2.8; 200mm f/2.8; 200mm f/2; 200mm f/1.8 (with x1.4 or 2X converters); 300mm f/2.8; 300mm f/2; 500mm f/4; 500mm f/4.5; 600mm f/4; 600mm f/5.6; 800mm f/5.6; etc. in either Canon EOS, Canon FD, Nikon Nikkor AF, or Nikkor MF Ai/Ais.

There are many other lenses to choose from...this is just a short selection off the top of my head.

[Ron Stoecklein]

Recently purchased the Xl2--I am thinking of purchasing the Ef adapter to use my Canon 100-400 lens in addition to the 20x or would I be better of using a 1.6X extender with the 20x?

And if I went with the EF adapter and the 100-400 is it necessary to support both camera boday and lens with something akin to the Ronrail?

Also I have played around with hand holding the xl2 with the 20x--shooting surf footage--I do have a decent tripod and fluid head--that works great ---I just like the reaction time to shooting without the tripod---yes it's heavy and I could probably realistically shoot for no more than an hour or so--just curious as to any comments in that regard.

Also curious as to any custom presets that might be used for shooting surf.

Thanks for everyone who has fed this forum--I have learned an incredible amount of info!!
Ron

[Dale Guthormsen]

Ron,

I have been around telephoto lenses and duplex extenders for years. The 1.6 is all right for an extender, I own one. it is all right until you get out to the distance then it softens to much. I prefer the 2x century on my gl2 to the 1.6 on my xl2. I use a few canon telephotos on my xl2 and I would definitely recomend the zoom lens if it is a good lens. If you already have the lens do not waste your money on the extender, but if its all you can afford go for it.
All multipliers soften the picture. I did a few comparison clips in the under water and over land group. you could look the up. It was last summer.

[Ron Stoecklein]

Thanks Dale--do you use the ef adapter--and if so are you using dual support for the lens and the camera body?

As mentioned I have the canon 100-400--so if the extenders are a bit soft I'd prefer the gain in telephoto I get with the 100-400--just a bit nervous mounting all that to the tripod.

thanks
Ron

[Dale Guthormsen]

ron,

I do not have an ef adapter. I have canon fd lenses and I purchased a mechanical mount. It has to be used totally manual which is fine for me. If I had your lens i would use the ef adapter.

I think you definitely need to have some further support on the lens. I am building my own out of aluminum channel. Had I the spare cash I would use a ron's Rail. Not cheap but a work of fine machining!!! worth the expense.
to be honest, anything over 300mm is basicly unmanagble for me. My 500mm zoom I just can't use until I get a rail to support everything and get a rons sight on it.

I never filmed surfing but back in the 60's I used a 9,6" jacobs surf board when I lived in southern California.

Now i think I would do some filming instead.


www.ronsrail.com

[Ron Stoecklein]

thanks Dale---

I actually surfed back inthe 60's as well---had a Weber performer back then--I'd like to have it and the Jacobs 9'6" now--worth some bucks--still surf 3-4 days a week but see a time when I may spend more time shooting at some point in the future!!

Someone had shown a mount that they built for dual support--not sure if you have seen it on this site. It kind of gave me some ideas but was hard to see any detail of the added bracket.

If you've seen any plans or additional detail on building your own mount --would really love to see it.

I was thinking of getting the Canon 3x--but am thinking I may put the money towards the Ronrail if I can't figure soemthing out that works fairly easily--it looks like the sight is pretty cool too--now see if we still had the old boards we could sell them to support a new habit!!!

thanks
Ron

[Ron Stoecklein]

Dale just received this email back from a recent inquiry--160.00 for lens support system--have no idea how well it would work--I'm sure the ronrail systme is far superior--but for the money this could be good--

Thank you for your interest in Cavision's products.

Here is a link to our website showing the rods support system we offer for
the Canon XL2 - http://www.cavision.com/rods/minidv.htm - RS-15IIM - 200.00.
I would recommend removing the front bracket and the t-riser from the front
of the rods support (this is used to connect to a matte box) and replacing
it with the R15-LS25 - lens support belt - 75.00 -
http://www.cavision.com/rods/lenssupport.htm . When you remove the front
bracket and t-riser the cost of the RS-15IIM drops to 160.00. All prices are
in US funds.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Sincerely
Jason Connors
Cavision Enterprises Ltd.
Tel: 604 298 9053

[Dale Guthormsen]

ron,

for the price of 235 dollars it looks like it might do the job for using the larger lenses. If you get one I would like to hear about how it works out for you. Get a rons lazer sight and you have a rig for about 450 dollars.

Must remember of course that carbon wil not be as rigid as aluminum. If you intend to expand to some larger heqavier lenses the rons rail will give you more distance between the two steady points and it will be sturdier. Most heavier lenses also have threaded steady mounts on them and I do not know if the cavivison will work with that. Just some thoughts. In the long haul rons rail is the way to go in my book. If I get my rail finished I will take a picture or two of it for you.

[Meryem Ersoz]

my EF adapter crapped out...it doesn't seem to be letting any light in. the red light is on, so i don't think it needs a battery change. or does it? i hooked it up to a 400mm lens, and it flashed the word "lens" is red, but seemed to let in some light but the image was staticky. i hooked it up to another long lens, and didn't get any light in at all. no flashing red "lens" signal.

are electrical components on the fritz? i've never changed the battery, so i don't know how to recognize the symptoms. i don't want to buy a new battery if this thing is simply fried. does this sound familiar to anyone?

p.s. the lenses work fine on my still cameras, so i don't think the lenses are the issue.....

[Stuart Claggett]

I have not had this problem. I would check the battery first and make sure all the contacts are clean.

[Sonny Horsfall]

I had the same problem but the battery had been in for a year or two so I changed it, this appeared to resolve the problem, however, after a few days it started doing the same thing.

I then decided to try another battery but I didn't turn off the camera first (potentially bad) as I slid out the battery cover it started working again, further investigation proved it was in fact a poor contact between the battery and the terminals inside.

There is a small amount of play in the battery compartment and after placing a small piece of card behind the cover the problem is solved. I don't really know why this should happen after working fine for so long but it did, happily the card has fixed it.

[Meryem Ersoz]

thanks, guys. i'm going to muck around with it a bit, according to your suggestions, sonny, and see if i can't get it to work again. this little bit of plastic is a $350 piece of gear, and i hate to spend for another, if i don't have to....

[Joshua Gross]

Would combining a Canon XL2 EF Adapter with a Canon EOS Mount Microscope adapter provide a proper/clear image when attached to a microscope? Or will the natural maginfication of the XL2 EF adapter make it too difficult to focus? I've seen posts regarding Canon XL2 Microscope Adapters but I am unsure if this variation would work... thanks for reading.

Josh

[Joshua Gross]

Would combining a Canon XL2 EF Adapter with a Canon EOS Mount Microscope adapter provide a proper/clear image when attached to a microscope? Or will the natural maginfication of the XL2 EF adapter make it too difficult to focus?

[Alkim Un]

Originally Posted by Eric A Robinson

Thanks for that Stuart. How much in the way of control do you have? for example could you do a panning shot or would there be too much in the way of shake?

I am getting a cannon 100-400 to use with my D30, has anyone used that combination which on the XL2, would be 780 - 3120!

eric,

ı ve been using xl2 with 100-400 for 1 year. I ve produced 6 2minute short wildlife wilm for "target zero extiction" campaign and broadcasted at CNN-TURK and iz-tv. I plan to share these movies with dv info wildlife forum but at the moment there is some copyrihgt issues ı need to resolve..

so canon 100-400 is the only tele lens in the market, that produce enough quality images and extensive zoom.

so do not look any other tele lens if you already have canon 100-400. though you dont have much alternative for both quality and abilitiy to extend 4x ultra tele zoom. only alternatives are the sigma zoom lenses. 100-300 f/4 and 120-300 f/2.8. I havent tried these lenses, but I will try them soon.

only issue for the canon 100-400 lens is there is a huge sample variation, this means my 100-400 and yours produce quite different results. unfortunately I have the bad sample so I sold it and will try my friend's 100-400. another reason of selling my 100-400 is I plan to jump high def league, and this lens (my 100-400 sample) cant resolve enogh for high def picture.

when you use 100-400 with xl2, it becames 800-3200 mm apprx. but practical focal area is 800-2300mm. beyond 2300, it is imposible to pan tilt, and also atmospheric turbulance is a problem.

so try to use heaviest and high end tripod with this combo. another important note is to mount body of xl2 to head also.

hope these help, enjoy your xl2,
thanks,
alkim.