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/)
-   -   Problem of EF adapter (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-gl-series-dv-camcorders/92867-problem-ef-adapter.html)

Chris Soucy August 31st, 2007 01:42 AM

And a bit of geosocial background....
for those who wouldn't know India from their elbow.

Delhi - The political capital, probably equates (in USA terms) to Washington, DC

Bangalore - The "high tech" capital, their equivalent to "Silicon Valley", not that far from where Ashok lives.

Mumbai (Bombay) - The undisputed commercial capital of India, also combines the thriving (bigger than Hollywood) Indian film industry, so is probably a cross between New York and LA.

Thought that might be of some help in getting the picture. Why? Hey, why not?


PS: Ashok, how far is it from where you are to Mumbai? Did that bus ride once and remember being practically crippled it took so long. Interested to know just how far it is.

Ashok Mansur August 31st, 2007 02:16 AM

Well Chris es .......
This is plural as both of you have the same name, sorry joking. It's undisputedly a Canon EOS.
Thanks Scott, You'll love DVINFO forum it's like gold mine, dig further you'll have immense treasure. At last others are also contributing, Per Johan plz say something about XL 100-400mm.
Well Dharwad is 12hrs by road almost 600kms from Mumbai earlier Bombay, also called Bollywood because of a huge film industry imitating Hollywood & as Chris says it's commercial capital of India. I’ll try to give picture of Dharwad It's on Mumbai Bangalore high way, from my place west side Panaji Goa is 185kms. Dharwad is known for education & Pedha a milk sweet delicacy.
Again rains making life misery here. plz keep responding.

Andrew M Astbury August 31st, 2007 02:35 AM

Ashok - when you mention the XL 100-400 I'm curious as to what you mean; is this some new lens I know nothing about, or do you refer to the EF 100-400, which works superbly on my XL2 via the EF adaptor??

Chris Soucy August 31st, 2007 03:24 AM

(and at lengths NOT to hijack this thread) Andrew, checked out your site, wow. Couldn't get past the opening screen but from what I saw you are pretty d**m good.

Shall be interesting to see how the dialogue goes with Ashok re the 100 - 400.


Chris Soucy August 31st, 2007 03:28 AM

Hi Ashok.............
12 hours eh, no wonder I was a basket case after. Whatever, it will (hopefully) be worth it if this sorts the problem once and for all.

Keep us posted.


Ashok Mansur August 31st, 2007 09:19 AM

That's my wish dream lens, let Canon introduce it. why don't you all people mail Chris Hurd to put pressure on Canon. See if there is huge demand for it they might consider.
I too hope for that Chris.


Andrew M Astbury August 31st, 2007 09:45 AM

Ashok - I couldn't see Canon being bothered - if you are wanting such short focal lengths, your standard 20X tops out at 108mm, so if you purchased say a Canon EF-S 17-55mm F:2.8 IS USM Lens, via the EF adaptor that would equate to 130-420mm (in 1/3" chip format) - remember, stills lenses are a lot higher quality optic than the 20x.

I take it then that the EF 100-400mm stills lens (approx: 780-3100mm on an XL2) is too much magnification for you?



Per Johan Naesje August 31st, 2007 02:36 PM


Originally Posted by Ashok Mansur (Post 737336)
...Per Johan plz say something about XL 100-400mm

Well, as Andrew says I don't think the marked will be high enough for Canon to produce such a lens.
Think about the costs of devolpment this would bring out, to a very narrow customer group.

I know Canon reps are reading this forum, so I think they got the idea already!

Chris Soucy August 31st, 2007 09:39 PM

Hi Ashok...
Can you just confirm something for me as I am a bit confused. What you are asking for is a 100 - 400 mm zoom with an XL mount and the internal electronics necessary to run with an XL camera built in? Just to enable use without an EF adapter?

Is this correct or am I just being obtuse? Has this been spurred by your spate of problems with the EF adapters (as yet unproved) or are there other issues coming into play here of which I'm unaware?

I don't really want to say more on the subject till I've got this right.

If you could explain this in detail I'd be most appreciative.


PS. Upon reflection, would it not be a good idea to start another thread for this specific subject so we can keep the EF adapter airwaves clear, and you can set up a poll/discussion elsewhere, specifically for what XL users want to see regarding new lenses etc for the XL series cameras? Don't think I can guaranteed it will have any effect, but you won't know till you try. If you got 300 bods to say they want what you want, hey, it might work.

PPS. If you asked Chris H nicely enough, he might even put it up there as a sticky (I said "might").

Chris Hurd August 31st, 2007 10:13 PM


Originally Posted by Ashok Mansur (Post 737426)
See if there is huge demand for it they might consider.

Ashok, in all honesty there's you and about twenty or thirty other guys who would love to have a lens like that. For a demand to be huge, it would have to be thousands of shooters. The costs of R&D, milling, design etc. pretty much prevent this kind of short-run specialized lens production from happening, at an affordable price anyway. It just isn't going to happen, my friend, not at this level anyway.

Chris Hurd August 31st, 2007 10:14 PM


Originally Posted by Chris Soucy (Post 737726)
would it not be a good idea to start another thread for this specific subject... specifically for what XL users want to see regarding new lenses etc for the XL series cameras?

Yes a separate thread for that would be a very good idea.

Ashok Mansur September 1st, 2007 06:45 AM

Andrew, Chris S, Per Johan & Chris H........
Thanks for your opinion, I started the new thread & will stand by my wish lens. what to do, with two EF adapters experience I don't have the confideness to go in the wilderness.


Chris Soucy September 1st, 2007 03:11 PM

Hi Ashok.......
Check out my post here:


Just for your information. Two heads might be better than one and a bit of moral support never goes amiss.


Chris Soucy September 1st, 2007 06:05 PM

Lateral Thinking...........
takes one to some strange places.

Having trawled all viable records on DVinfo, and come up with nothing on this subject, a small corner of my mind has been worrying this for days.

The following is based on:

a. Canon reps do, indeed, read these posts.

b. An assumption: That Canon Inc. themselves keep a detailed record of faults and fixes, accessable by Canon staff, so as to keep from re - inventing the wheel. Seems logical to me, but hey.

Anyway, if anyone at Canon Inc. reads this, AND there is such a system AND a list of likely possibles can be found, why not give the bods @ Canon India the heads up, so that they don't have to re - invent the wheel themselves.This particular ball has been fumbled too many times already, the ongoing scenario isn't making anyone look good.

The shots seem to be getting longer but this just might be worth a try.

Still on the case.


Andrew M Astbury September 2nd, 2007 05:07 AM


Originally Posted by Ashok Mansur (Post 671375)
.......... And continuous cranking sound comes in the lens.
Ashok Mansur

I've just been re-reading this thread from the very begining and came across this post by Ashok.

The only reason for any 'noise' comming from the lens is the AF motor(s) working - as I pointed out before, Canon tell the user in the adaptor manual to TURN OFF the lens AFfacility - EF lens/EOS body autofocus uses ultra sonic motors controled by seperate focus sensors (45 of them in the pro stills bodies) - the way the XL2 autofocuses is TOTALLY INCOMPATABLE with EF lenes.

Could this be the reason for Ashoks' problems afterall??

Chris Soucy September 2nd, 2007 02:33 PM

Hi Andrew...........
Good thought. The only reason I don't (think) this is the problem is that both EF adaptors only went into this mode after some time (month(s)) after going into service.

Andrew, if you have a similar rig, can you check whether, if the AF is switched on and thus the motor kicks in, the camera registers a "Check Lens" warning, as seems to be the case with Ashok's rig?

If your rig does behaves this way, then it is concievable that Ashok has inadvertantly hit the AF switch, and this is all just "operator error".

What an anti - climax that would be!


Andrew M Astbury September 3rd, 2007 01:54 AM


Originally Posted by Chris Soucy (Post 738273)
Good thought. The only reason I don't (think) this is the problem is that both EF adaptors only went into this mode after some time (month(s)) after going into service.

Andrew, if you have a similar rig, can you check whether, if the AF is switched on and thus the motor kicks in, the camera registers a "Check Lens" warning, as seems to be the case with Ashok's rig?

If your rig does behaves this way, then it is concievable that Ashok has inadvertantly hit the AF switch, and this is all just "operator error".

What an anti - climax that would be!


Chris - tried it with the 100-400mm IS USM - no warning!

The point I was trying to make is simply that if Ashok was hearing noises from the lens then the AF motor is all it could possibly be - the AF system in the lens must be attempting to power-up/activate - this should be impossible if the lens AF switch is set to OFF.

If I attach my standard x20 and turn the XL2 on I always get a couple of clicking sounds from the lens - I'm certain the AF on the video lens is screw operated - it's certainly slow enough to be! - and I assume the clicking sound is the screw drive trying to find it's end-stops or something.

If I attach any Nikon fit lens via my plain, non electronic Optex mount, I ALWAYS get a 'CHECK LENS' warning flashing in the EVF for 10 seconds, then it dissappears and everything works.
The CHECK warning would appear to activate when the body can not 'talk' to the lens.

I could see a possibility that leaving the EF lens AF switched on could cause a failiure over time - it could cause some sort of 'feed-back loop' scenario that eventually 'fries' something but it just frustrates me a bit that Ashok won't say EXACTLY what has happened, the circumstances leading up to the failure and how he set his rig up!
I have mentioned the AF switch in a couple of previous posts and he hasn't said yes or no to my question - so basically I'm only going on guess-work.

But if I had 2 examples of a piece of kit go wrong on me in exactly the same way I know I'd be suspecting myself as a possible cause of the problem (not that that would ever happen 'cos I'm perfect!! - biggrin biggrin!).

Ashok Mansur September 3rd, 2007 03:06 AM

Thanks Andrew.....
Well then I will begin the story one more time. Step by step.
1, Switch off the XL2,
2, swithch the focus button to Manual,
3, Attach the EF adapter to EOS,
4, attach the adapter (along with EOS) to XL2,
5, Switch on XL2,
6, Usually in manual mode I operate or AV mode.
Now after I bought 519/525, will switch off the IS too.
While removeing the lens, open the aperture fully & swithch of the XL2, remove EF adapter. attach XL 20X lens.
Initially with Ef adapter I didn't have any problem at all, sudenlly one fine day, After attaching EF adapter + EOS lens the warning comes in the EVF " CHECK LENS" I cann't control aperture setting, it's fixed. later only "LENS" words started to blink in the EVF. Humming noice started in the lens.


Andrew M Astbury September 3rd, 2007 10:35 AM

Ashok - you originally mentioned a cranking sound, but if it's humming.....?

Does the noise sound a bit like a faint scraping sound that rises slightly in pitch and then ends with a click - if it is then thats not the AF it's the IS, that's the noise my 100-400 lens makes sometimes when I've mounted the 1.4x converter behind it on an EOS body in low light.

No EF lens IS type (there are currently 4 types I, II, III & IV) are compatible with the XL2, and only type III & IV should be used on a tripod. The IS on the lens you are using is type II, not for use on a tripod.

Canon don't specify NOT to use the IS on EF lenses fitted to the XL2 but they do say that the IS will work in a manner different to the way it was intended!

Using the IS at these big focal lengths is a bit of a waste of time Ashok, and it won't work properly anyway so if I was you I'd turn that off too.

Neither would I be using AE - manual everytime.

What's happened to you is very unfortunate indeed and I can understand your frustration, I suppose there is a remote possibility that both adaptors could be faulty, but I can imagine what Canon would be saying - it'll be your fault!

Just to reassure you, my EF adaptor has got about 250 hours on it and it functions fine, but as I said, I only use it to physically mount the lens and to control the aperture, nothing else, IS is always OFF & AE is never used.

All the best


Chris Soucy September 3rd, 2007 11:41 PM

Hi guys..........
Not going to be able to add anything to this discussion at this point, as I think until Canon have been able to check this kit out, we're all stuck.

(When is that happening Ashok?)

However, I don't remember seeing a response to my original suggestion to dry all this gear out - did that get done Ashok? (Or did I miss that somewhere along the line?)

I am still firmly of the belief that this may well be the culprit, having been in that neck of the woods in "the wet". It's somewhat akin to standing in a 44 gallon drum of hot water, with the hot tap of a shower running on to your head, just for good measure (24 hours a day!).

Then at night, the temperature drops a few degrees and the RH leaps from 95% up to 100%, and even the walls of your hotel room start to sweat.

You can imagine the implications for camera and electronic gear.

Heaven help you if you walk into a flash 5 star hotel or similar with wall to wall air con with your nicely water vapour filled gear. Instant fog machine internally.

But, at the end of the day, we won't know till we know.


Ashok Mansur September 5th, 2007 08:55 AM

Hi Guys,......
Right now I'm at Canon center from noon till now. Mr KC Maurya Engineer of AGIV India Mubai, checked the gear & he opened the EF didn't found any fault in it, checked the voltage in open condion. EF battery power supply was low as it was 1-3 volts variation, so he applied the regulated power supply to it. It worked fine & the indicator light glowed. Tried on XL1 worked fine. Bought a new battery(2CR5) from the market & put it on, story repeats battery idicator on EF started blinking & the EVF screen started on off. Aperture setting can't be set, he checked the voltage of the battery even the regulated power supply applied no change.
Mr Maurya cleaned the PCB with cleaner solution still no changes. He tried with XL1, same problem, think it must be the adapter not the XL2 body. & they can't pin point the exact problem.
Andrew it's humming sound, I checked it. The AF was switched to Manual mode.
Please do something, Specially Canon Staff. Others are trying to help at their best what's happening to you Canon pals?


Andrew M Astbury September 5th, 2007 10:45 AM


Originally Posted by Ashok Mansur (Post 739556)
Andrew it's humming sound, I checked it.

Like I said - that'll be the OIS in the lens that's making the noise.

What help can anybody be to you Ashok - I've told you what to do to stop all your problems, manual mount and manual lens.

Chris Soucy September 5th, 2007 05:04 PM

Fault finding a microprocessor controlled electro mechanical servo system I've never seen, with no System Logic overview, circuit diagrams or schematics etc etc across 6 time zones and 7000 miles by e - mail with parties at both ends whose grasp of each others native language is less than perfect.

Hey, should be a breeze!

Ashok/ Andrew - how's this?

Voltage is low because something is pulling it down. Motor is running when it shouldn't be, which would pull down the voltage. How many switches are there on the EF adapter?

What happens if they are disconnected from the pcb? It only takes nanoamps to pull a CMOS logic gate up / down, which could easily happen if a switch which is in the "off" position is actually allowing a tiny current through anyway. Get enough moisture into the wrong design of switch and it's operation is going to be haphazard at best.

Another option is that a switch is open/ closed[single throw] (relying on a pull up/ down resistor on the pcb to pull the gate up/ down) instead of being double throw.

If it isn't a switch it could be a sensor, but having never seen an EF adaptor OR an EF lens I don't know what other external component I/P's there could be to this pcb.

If disconnecting every single I/P still leaves you with the problem, then it must be on the pcb itself.

There is also the lens itself. If a switch on the lens feeds a signal back to the EF adapter, it is concievable that the fault is there and not with the adapter. All it would take is a small difference in how the EF adapter interfaces with the lens as compared to a "real" EOS camera for the lens to work fine with the camera but not fine with the adapter.

It is quite possible that the interface circuitry in the EF adapter (pretending to be an EOS camera) has a different (higher) I/P impedance than a real camera, thus allowing a miniscule current that would not affect the camera to actually activate the EF adapter.

The list just goes on and on.

All of which is most probably of no use to you whatsoever, as you're back home, minus your system, whilst Canon scratches their heads. Or not.

As for having "Canon pals", well, apart from the service manager @ Canon NZ who is upgrading the firmware on my XH A1 even as I type, I don't have any. He's only ever seen one EF adapter in his life and that was only to fix a bent plate due to a drop. So, not a lot of help there then.

I shall stay tuned for the next exciting episode.


Andrew M Astbury September 6th, 2007 01:17 AM

Hi Chris - there's only one switch on the EF adaptor, the AE push-button, which also has a locking lever to hold it permanently on.

As a last resort thought I do wonder how Ashok has had the combo mounted - the lens weighs 1.6 kilos so if he's mounted the lens on the t/pod and left the XL2 'hanging off the back' in free air perhaps there's a very slim chance this has strained something or damaged a contact. If I was using that lens I'd have it on my rail system in order to keep everything rigid and in alignment.

But to be honest this is going nowhere, it doesn't really matter what went wrong with either the first or second EF adaptor - the only problem is Ashok can't work as he wishes.

That's a problem only Ashok can solve and he basically has four options:

1. Buy,beg,borrow or steal another EF adaptor.
2. Switch to a manual lens/mount adaptor combo - my personal ideal option.
3. Just use his 20x and get closer to his subject.
4. Give up and go home.

I doubt there's anyone on this forum who can solve a problem Canon can't and in reality the only person who can help Ashok is Ashok himself.

Chris Soucy September 6th, 2007 04:28 AM

Hi Andrew........
I understand where you're coming from.

I gather from other threads that Ashok has a rail system in place, so that shouldn't be an issue.

I entirely agree with your comment: if Canon cannot find a solution to this problem, he is, without doubt, between a rock and a very hard place indeed.

I'm trying my best to keep as open a mind as possible on this entire issue, as I am very aware, as a result of spending many years on the highways and byeways, the length and breadth of India, of the differences between our two cultures.

You may have noticed that I have yet to receive an answer to my last big Q (and my first suggestion), not unexpected, just dissapointing.

You are correct, there is no one on this Forum who can wave a magic wand and sort his problems.

I will continue to offer what moral support I can, but realistically, nothing I say is going to make a blind bit of difference.

[Oh, hi Ashok, where have you been? We've been talking about you.]

I really don't know what else to say, except I really do hope whomever is on the case in Bombay knows their onions and can, indeed, solve this puzzle.


Andrew M Astbury September 6th, 2007 05:08 AM

Chris - I just find the whole thing a bit frustrating, as I'm sure Ashok does - but not for the same reasons!

The whole thread seams to have become bogged down in 'there's a problem - WHY?'

If I was Ashok I wouldn't be concerned with the 'why' until I'd finished the job - my immediate concern would be to seek and utilise the best alternative post haste in order to complete the task; and then look for someones' ass to go in a sling after!

I actually think you've been a bit of a 'saint' in this thread Chris - well done that man, you've got way more patience than me!



Chris Soucy September 7th, 2007 12:21 AM

Kind words indeed........
Andrew, and I thank you for them most humbly, but, alas, a Saint I Ain't.

My life partner would attest to that in spades. Just trying to lend what support I can to a fellow traveler along life's somewhat imperfect silicone highway.

I concur absolutely with your frustration. Mine has been equally as intense, more so, as I am well aquainted with the mountains Ashok is having to climb to deal with this problem.

I have, in the absence of any direct feedback, re - analysed my post of a day or so ago and gone back to my Electronic System Engineering roots (yet another incarnation) and come to the somewhat alarming conclusion that if the symptoms as described illustrate the sort of fault condition I can directly envisage, this will not be fixed by your average backroom techie.

This brings me to what is probably the most frustrating part of this. There is simply no direct conduit into the higher eschelons of Canon to alert them to the situation unfolding here.

Quite right, what does one single consumer in one of Canons smallest sales regions really matter?

Alas, there is the rub. There is no incentive whatsoever for Canon Inc. to engage in "heroic" efforts to fix this, as it simply is not in their interests to do so.

Enough said.

Moving on, yes, Ashok is, failing some miracle, going to have to consider some seriously expensive alternatives. Given the investment already made (a huge one by Indian standards) this is really going to be a major blow in every respect.

I am seriously hoping that Ashoks next post is going to be brimming with sweetness and light, as this will all be over. I'm also hoping to find a Honda Gold Wing in my Christmas stocking this year. I don't think I'll hold my breath for either.


PS. Ashok - what gives?

Ashok Mansur September 7th, 2007 03:41 AM

Hi pals.........
Sorry I didn't have a chance to mail, as most of the time I was on the move.
Now I am back at Dharwad after visiting Canon master service center Mumbai. Where Mr. Deepak, Canon Engineer has a ray of hope for me. He is checking my 70~200 2.8 IS & report by Monday. He suspects a fault with diaphragm as he tried with EOS 5D cam & there was some sort of aperture problem faced.
I tried their stock 70-200 2.8 IS & every thing looks good (why I'm using looks good b'cos earlier with regulated volt supply it functioned properly & after putting a fresh battery Back to zero).
I pray the God let the problem lies with Lens.
Andrew, Chris I'm a farmer by profession & my education is Social science subjects. So whatever technical knowledge having is only by experience. This just to inform you people, whatever knowledge I have regarding photography & video is from books, web & the knowledge shared by you all & of course by practice.


Chris Soucy September 7th, 2007 04:03 AM

Hi Ashok.....
Well, I suppose it's better than no news whatsoever. Fingers crossed and all the best. Please keep us posted.



Andrew M Astbury September 7th, 2007 02:05 PM

Ashok - I took it from previous postings, that the lens was working fine all the time.

I'm sure a lot of us have gleaned the majority of our knowledge, if not all, by the same methods as yourself.

Anyway, it would appear that you have perhaps found the root of the problem - maybe those fangled 'effing' adaptors aren't too bad afterall !!!!

Hope you get everything sorted out Ashok - and if some of us don't get free tickets to the premier after all this then someone's in big trouble!!!!

Stay safe!


Chris Soucy September 10th, 2007 04:46 PM

Ominous silence..........
from India.



Chris Soucy September 12th, 2007 01:03 AM




Ashok Mansur September 19th, 2007 02:31 AM

Sorry Pals...
I wished to respond only after getting it & receieved it right now only, mounted EF & XL2. It's working, no sound, warnings. Hope this will last long. Canon India charged Rs2809/- for repairs, only cash bills no details in that, For what they have charged god knows.
Thank you all for giving me the moral support in crucial time, I request you all to write to Canon India or Canon, to respond mails via mail, If they wish they can have interaction through phone too. But they have to respond through mail first.


Chris Soucy September 20th, 2007 04:08 AM

Hi Ashok............
Glad you got your gear back, apparantly working ok. Shame there is no explanation.

As for contacting Canon on your behalf Ashok, I think you can write that off as a complete non starter. Why would they be interested in a third party contacting them about your problem?

Let us know how it works out, and don't forget the info about the new tripod/ head setup you have!


Ashok Mansur September 22nd, 2007 02:02 AM

Halo Chris.......
I have started one more thread, in Open DV discussion.Which is an elementary question. kindly go through it.

Chris Soucy September 22nd, 2007 03:29 AM

I assume you mean me......
yeah, got it already, giving it some thought.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:29 AM.

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