Does the S have same double image prob as XL1?

[Bob Andren]

Hello. Great online community i've just discovered here.
My situation: I have an XL1. I shoot weddings. I'm planning to shoot a DV feature with my XL1 or buy an XL1S for it, but first I need to know:
will the lens on the XL1S give me the same problem I encounter on every wedding I shoot?, which is-

when indoor light sources are in the frame, most of them do the following: create a moving double image of the light source, almost like a "ghost" of said light source dancing around in the frame; and/or produce "fireflies"-little beads/balls of light that spin and dance around same light source, these light sources being candles, chandeliers, wall mounted light fixtures, almost anything in an indoor setting. An ex of the "ghost" i mentioned: best man giving a toast, light fixture behind him, which then appears also over the guys face, and moves around. Could not switch my position.

I shoot always in manual mode; I switched off the image stabilization and it did not help. I've read elsewhere suggestions about taking off the protective filter, but don't like the idea of an unprotected lens, esp. given the behavior of rowdy guests at receptions.

I got one of the XL1 cameras that had the notorious defective lens when shipped from the factory, I later had it "fixed" at the canon facility in NJ, so although it no longer went out of focus during zooms, the tech said the "fireflies" will still be there, just the way the lens is designed.

Is there a lens made by Canon or anyone that does not have this problem? As I'm familiar with my XL1 by now, I'd like to shoot the digi feature with it, as it has a generally softer look than others and I want as much of a film look as possible. So, keep the XL1 and get a new lens? get the XL1S and still get a new lens? Keep the XL1, shoot the movie with it and buy a VX2000 to shoot the weddings?
Thank you for any advice.
Bob

[Ken Tanaka]

Glad to have you aboard.

The situation you describe sounds like a type of lens flare/back reflection, a phenomenon that all lenses exhibit under certain circustances. The immediate work-around is to, well, avoid the problem by taking note of room lighting. But that might not always be a practical solution for an event videographer such as yourself. You often have to take the shots you can get as the event unfolds.

One solution that has worked well for me, as well as for many others, is to remove all filters from the lens, including your protective/UV filter. This eliminates one potential source of internal light reflection which sounds like what you're seeing (point source lights reflecting off of your lens' outer element onto the inner surface of a filter and then back into the lens as a reflection.

BTW, lens surfaces are tougher than you might think. You could always replace the filter later or use a matte box with slide-in filters which would make removal/replacement easier (or even eliminate the problem altogether.

Take this for a test drive and see if it helps you, too.

Best Regards,

[Jeff Donald]

I agree with Ken, remove the filter. If you must use a filter get the very best either B+W or Heliopan. Tiffen, Hoya and just about all the rest of the screw in filters are just OK at best. Some do more harm than good.

Jeff

[Bob Andren]

Thank you Ken and Jeff, and thank you for the welcome Ken. I will remove the filter and see what happens; I think I'll be getting the XL1S regardless of the lens; and when the $ comes in get a VX2000 with a beachtek adaptor.

[Bob Andren]

Jeff & Ken-
You were right! I removed the Tiffen protective filter on a job Sat and it worked! No more fireflies, beads/balls of light, double images or ghosts! Thank you! I have lived with this problem for over a year. But- Why didn't Canon tell buyers about this!? Would have saved a LOT of aggravation.
I'm doing a wedding this past Saturday, and the guy shooting a reception in the room next to me has a Canon XL1, in fact I had shot a job with him about a year ago and had been trying to get in touch with him about XL1 matters, and I tell him about removing the filter. Like me, he had been unaware of the solution, he thought he had to live with this problem. Thanks to u, two shooters have been enlightened. Again, my heartfelt thanks.
Bob

[Nathan Gifford]

More to the point, just imagine how long it would have taken you to find this solution without the Internet...

Besides these guys, through Chris Hurd a juicy bone for keeping this site open...

[Ken Tanaka]

Bob,
I'm really thrilled that this trick worked for you.

Re: "Why didn't Canon tell buyers about this!? Would have saved a LOT of aggravation. " It's not a flaw of the lens. You could have the same problem with a $22,000 broadcast lens. If anything, it's a flaw of your Tiffen filter. The next step for you is to invest in a Heliopan or B+W UV filter as Jeff recommended earlier. These top-grade filters are generally thinner than the mid-grade filters which helps to reduce distortion and, in some cases, helps to reduce internal glare also. Some have coatings on both sides to help prevent your problem.

I know you're apprehensive about having a naked lens. I don't necessarily advocate going nude at weddings which are liberally lubed with inebriants. But keep nudity in your playbook. Also, consider a lightweight matte box which would enable you to remove a filter quicker than a screw mount.

Happy shooting!