This is the link to the filter I found on ebay

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Hoya-PRO1-Digi...QcmdZViewItemo

It is probably not so important with video as you only are only useing the centre section of the lens.

Regards

Mick

Canon 100-400 L Lens with EF Adapter
 

Hi Mick,

I have both the H1 and the Canon 100-400 L lens. I used the lens and the EF adapter on an XL 1 and was happy with it, but the same setup on the H1 flat out blew me away. Even at 400 the image was crystal clear. If I'm not mistaken, with the multiplication factor, that's somewhere in the neighborhood of a 2800 mm lens equivalent.

Several things to keep in mind though. You need a good sized tripod and head to keep things stable and everyone is correct when they say turn off the stabilization feature of the lens. Secondly, when you have the lens extended out past 200 mm, there is an awful lot of weight on both the EF adapter and the lens mount of the camera. If I was going to do a lot of work with that setup, I'd think about some sort of rail support for the lens. Lastly, use the peeking, viewfinder magnification, and anything else you can lay your hands on. Exact focus with that setup is reeeal critical.

Thanks,
Richard

What about the 75-300
 

By chance, did anyone tested a cheaper lense, like a 75-300 ? or other lenses that are not in the L series.

Well, I'm answerring to myself, 15 months after!

I've just tested the Canon 70-300 IS USM lense, on the EF adapter, which has a very good reputation, even if it's not in the L serie. It is cheaper (average 650 euros) and lighter than my 100-400.

Unfortunatly, results are very disapointing. It's very difficult to adjust the focus because the focus ring has a very short course. At 100mm, 200mm & 300mm, the sharpness is clearly inferior to the 100-400.

I've also tried an old manual Nikon zoom, a 80-200, with a ring that convert it to the EF mecanism. That lense was very good in 35mm photography but on the XL-H1 it is not as sharper as the Canon 100-400 and there are some many chromatic aberations with it. I hoped an old lens (not AF) would be easier for the manual focusing, that was a mistake. And the lake of a stabilizer is a problem too.

So, from theses tests, it appears that we should only use the very good 20x zoom of the camera or the L lenses series.

Hi Ronan,

I am not surprised it did not come up to scratch, it not in the same league as an 'L' lens. As an aside I took a look at your latest video on your web site about the wildlife photographers. I though it was very well done, I really enjoyed it, its a shame my knowledge of French is not better so I could have understood the script more. Thanks for the link to your site.

Regards

Mick

Autofocus
 

Lauri,

When using the EF adapter is autofocus completely inoperable, or is just the quality affected?

Thanks, AL

Hi Alan,

I know I'm not Lauri, but I can answer the question. It is totally disabled.

Regards

Mick

Autofocus
 

Hey Mick,

Thanks for your reply.

I am curious as to why an EF (Electro Focus) adapter doesn't work. Unless by changing the focal length, the motor can't handle the magnification factor. If that's the case, why does Canon call it an "EF"?

As these 52 year old eyes don't work so well through a viewfinder anymore. I may have to change viewfinders or add a small monitor.

Regards, AL

My guess is that autofocues requires a control system with feedback between the lens motor and the camera, and the autofocus in EF-lenses and EOS-bodies is not compatible with XL-series camcorders which have CCD's. Prehaps, the autofocus would work if the Xl H1 had a CMOS-sensor.

However, in my experience the peaking and scaling functions in XL H1 helps a lot. I had with all XL-series cameras a bit uncertain feeling whether the focus is right. But, then viewing the footages afterwards on the display realized that the concern was not necessary. Somehow the Canon EVFs manage to create uncertainty although there no technical reason for it.

Thank you Mick !

Regards,