Anyone shooting with H1 + EF adapter??
 

jsut curious..

Im soon to be in the posession of a 5d with afew L series lenses and a couple of others and i was wondering if anyone here had already shot with the H1 and these lenses..

ive seen footage shot on XL2 shot with EF with different lenses, and to say it was VASTLY superior than the stock lens would be an understatement.

Im just curious as to your findings with these lense mounted on H1 body.. if any..

If I remember correctly, there's a person here who has used the EF adapter on the H1 and had some samples posted on their website. They were shooting wildlife & wilderness shots I believe.

Just keep in mind you have to add like a 7.2x multiplier to your lens values- plus you get no image stabilization. So you have to be a long way from your intended subject and make sure you're ROCK SOLID on a VERY STEADY tripod. Thats the only thing that worries me.

If you shoot anything with it upload some footage if you can! I'd love to see it. Congrats on accessing the 5d by the way- thats a sweet ride!

I use a Canon 300 2.8 L lens on the XL H1 with acceptable results, with the following problems. My belief is that the adapter is the weak part of the system, with lower quality glass than the 20X lens, creating a slightly softer image. The 300mm lens does not have quite the resolution or clarity (if those are the right terms) to give as good a picture as the 20X.

It is very difficult to adjust focus with the EF lenses, as they are all manual. No auto features.

Also, the Canon digital lenses will not fit the adapter because of a raised portion on the lens mount.

Check my website for photo's of various lens - camera combo's.

For long lenses, you will need a RONSRAIL!!!

ww.ronsrail.com

hmm.. if its THIS much of a hassle, then i wont bother with the H1.. i'll just go the A1 with a fixed lense...

considering the shallower DoF u get with a Prime as well as the fact that a 12mp pic is sharp enough for a HDV image.. one would have like to have thought that the 2 would work in tandem without any sacrifices.. hopefully canon release a new HD EF adapter to go with the H1 and the new auto lenses..

i guess the A1 will do considering its also a 20x optical... for me, decision making factor for the H1 was the toss up was between the H1's ability to change lenses... bummer...

Macro EF lenses work very well
 

I regularly use the H1 with both the Canon 180mm and 100mm macro lenses and the results are magnificent. So long as you do not stop right down (f11-f16 is sharpest) there is no softening that I can notice. I make wildlife documentaries and capture uncompressed HD 25P (PAL) via SDI to a computer with 15 hard disks raided together, giving me over 6TB hard disk space. The reason I mention this is that I specialise in insects and when filming life cycles will keep the camera running constantly 24/7 until for instance a pupa has hatched (I am filming a mud-wasp pupa developing at the moment and have been running the camera for more than 2 weeks day and night - just stopping to check what I have captured every day, extracting interesting bits, deleting the rest, then back to capturing). The camera is never switched off and never misses a beat! Forget about focusing using the viewfinder, though - I focus using an external monitor. Also, I set aperture and shutter speeds manually, using the calibrated monitor to judge what I am getting. To avoid heat on the subject, I use fibre-optic illumination.

Hi Tommy,
According to what others like Lauri in Finland has written this is not correct.
The stabilizer is built in the lens.
If the Canon EF lens has IS (image stabilizer) it will also work on the H1 through the Canon EF adapter.
However the IS could be of limited use because most of the interesting lenses are long and will appear extremely long on the H1 demanding tripod in most cases. Then IS could be best to normally leave in the off position unless in some cases according to Lauri. I will get my EF adapter hopefully in a few days and try this myself.
Regards Johan

If you're considering going to prime lenses and spending the $$'s for the EF adapter, you might want to check out the Letus35 or the Redrock M2 (or any of a number of vendors who make these). From what I've been told, they maintain the original focal length of the lens (no 7.2 multiplier) and give you the quality you are looking for. These are a bit more expensive (about $900-$1100) than the EF adapter, but I think they give you more options, lens wise.

Sigma lenses
 

Peter,
I'm one of the guys shooting wildlife with an ef-adapter and external lenses. Even though I shoot with a Canon XL2 I think I can give you some relevant information. First of all I'm very pleased with the way Canon has made it possible to use SLR lenses. For wildelifephotographers who wants to come as near as possible to the wildlife this is really good.
Myself are using Sigma lenses, they are much cheaper than original Canon lenses, but my opinion is that they give you almost the same crisp and sharp picture. My favorite lense for the moment is the Sigma 300mm f/2.8:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

You may view some footage at my website (see link in my signature). I also tried Sigma 150mm macro f/2.8 with good results too (MicroCosmos at my website).

I have nothing to do with the Sigma company, but I'm a very pleased user of their lenses.

This is indeed the case. As soon as the EF-adapter is swicthed on, the image stabilizer will also function. Of course, the IS designed for still photography has different goals than a one meant for a video camera. Still, occasionally (some of the modes of) the IS are useful to eliminate oscillation of the camcorder. When one attach the 600mm lens to XL H1, the combo is rather big and easily oscillates in strong wind.

Thats great to hear! When I saw some footage taken with my old XL1 using the adapter there was obviously no IS at all- but it may not have been an IS lens. Evidentally they had a long lense thru the adapter on a sturdy tripod, and then had to sandbag the tripod heavily to make the image look acceptable. I remember some posts when the adapter was first released many years ago talking about not having camera control of focus, or stabilization, and at that time a canon rep had posted that they wouldnt have any of those controls through the adapter- but again- that must have been due to the specific lenses they were attempting to use. I must have misread it!

Did you ever get any shots with your adapter and the H1? How is it?

Ron, I'm surprised that you haven't tried a Nikon Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 IF-ED using an XL adapter without the extra glass element.

It might also be possible to remove the glass element from the Canon L adapter to improve the quality of your footage when combined with SLR lenses on the XL bodies.

Tony;
I have just recently obtained an adapter for the Nikon lenses and am anxious to try it. Without the added glass , it may be an improvement. I have removed the glass from the Canon adapter, But it requires the glass to focus properly. I just returned from a trip to Yellowstone Park and had reasonable success with the Canon EF lenses. Used them sparingly to reduce chances of soft and out of focus images. I also need to calibrate for color and contrast to match the 20 X lens.

Ron

H1 + EF Adapter
 

Aloha Peter,

For whatever it's worth. I did shoot the last full moon using 600mm lens
on my H1.

http://www.surfshooterhawaii.com/iWe...on/6Oct06.html

I also have used Canon's 75-200 F2.8 and get pretty good results.
As most people pretty much agree, a bit softer on the shots,
and a very stable platform would be recommended.

A few other clips:

http://www.surfshooterhawaii.com/video/index.html

Aloha,

-Terry

That is very nice moon footage there Terence...I could sense the surfers, following a long day riding the rolling breakers, looking up at the night sky as their eyes follow the glowing full moon skating across a black carpet studded with stars.

The image does look very slightly soft, although this may be the Quicktime and does not closely compare to the raw file. Another reason is possibly due to there being no shadows over parts of the craters due to it being a full moon, and this gives the surface of the moon a flat appearance rather than the 'bumpy' surface of mountains and craters.

I've found that to obtain more detail it is often better to film a partial moon phase and slightly underexpose the footage. Filming a partial moon with a 300mm f/2.8 lens the craters can be seen very clearly and stand out in stark contrast. Shooting the same partial moon with a 600mm lens makes the craters pop-out from the lunar surface (due to the partial shadows across each crater) so that you can sense the three-dimensional landscape of mountain peaks and deep volcanic craters.

I'm editing some partial moon clips at the moment that I shot on a clear still night using the Nikkor 300mm IF-ED and 600mm IF-ED lenses (not on an XL-H1 but on an XL2 body) and I'm extremely happy with results.

I think the most important aspect of all for shooting the moon with long telephoto lenses is to pick the clearest night from a location with no wind or pollution in the air. Choosing a cold night or high location can also help in avoiding some of the waving patterns that the Earth’s heat waves cause in the lower atmospheric belt.

Try to never touch the camera or lens during the filming and at this extreme magnification even a few footsteps within 20-yards of the tripod can send tremours through the hard ground that manifest as slight vibration in the smooth video footage.

Thanks for the tips Tony!

Sorry, I guess I could of posted higher resolution of clip.
I'm very busy and had this online to show.

I agree, you can't touch the camera and lens. Must also stand back from it while I was setup on the backyard lawn...

I will give it another try using your tips and post higher resolution.

Mahalo!

-Terry
Waikele, Hawaii