Which Manual Lens - Comments on 14X Lens

[Robert Castiglione]

I am a happy XL1s user for about one year now.

My only regret was not buying the manual lens straight up.

I am about to rectify that situation.

The issue is whether I should get the "superseded" 14X lens or the new 16X lens.

What do people think?

I am only concerned with lens quality. I dont really mind re no zoom and manual aperture etc.

Are there happy 14X lens users out there?

Looking forward to comments and thoughts.

Rob

[Charles Papert]

Robert:

I am a very happy 14x user. I bought mine a few months ago, long after the 16x was available. For me, the added focal length at the long end of the zoom wasn't much of a big deal; if it had been at the wide end, it would have made a definite difference. The power zoom didn't sway me either, as I find the "stepped" nature of the XL1 zooms relatively unusable and also I have an external zoom setup that can work with any geared lens. A big plus was the traditional iris ring on the 14x which I find much more user friendly than the electronic version on the 16x, which makes it tough to make iris pulls. Combined with a Century .7x zoomthrough wide angle adaptor, I'm pretty well set for almost any situation.

[Andrew Petrie]

Charles, could you comment more on your .7 wide adapter experiences? I was going to go the same route, but with the 16x manual

[Jeff Donald]

I'll echo Charles' comments on the 14X. I really prefer the all manual aperture ring. No fumbling for the little wheel to make adjustments. As far a sharpness goes, you'd be splitting hairs to call one better than the other. Both are better than the stock lens (16X white lens).

[Nathan Gifford]

Check the article on the Watchdog site The Canon 16x Manual Servo Zoom Lens for the XL1 / XL1S by Watchdog's own Ken Tanaka.

It is an excellent article focuses on the 16X, it also discusses some of the pros and cons of the 14X.

Hope this helps...

[Charles Papert]

Andrew:

I got a prototype .7x adaptor directly from Century Optics as I have a friend there. There actually may be a couple more of these available if anyone is interested. The standard adaptor costs around $795 if I remember correctly, but this version only costs $300. The deal is that it was actually built for a different camera but they made an adaptor ring for the 14x lens for me. Optically it is the same as the production model, but it does vignette slightly in the corners, so it's only truly useful if you shoot 4:3 and letterbox to 16:9. Since that's pretty much the way I use my XL1, I was willing to make the compromise for the big savings. It's also lighter and smaller than the production version. If you or anyone else is interested, email me about this special adaptor and I will put you in touch with the guy who builds them.

[Robert Castiglione]

OK, thanks everyone.

I think I get the picture. I have read the article suggested on the comparison.

I have an opportunity to buy a 14X and will do so.

This is a very useful message board and all comments appreciated.

Rob

[Dylan Couper]

Looks like you've made up your mind, but to chip in, I'm also very happy with the 14x. Especially over the stock lens.

[Jean-Philippe Archibald]

I got a prototype .7x adaptor directly from Century Optics as I have a friend there. There actually may be a couple more of these available if anyone is interested. The standard adaptor costs around $795 if I remember correctly, but this version only costs $300. The deal is that it was actually built for a different camera but they made an adaptor ring for the 14x lens for me. Optically it is the same as the production model, but it does vignette slightly in the corners, so it's only truly useful if you shoot 4:3 and letterbox to 16:9. Since that's pretty much the way I use my XL1, I was willing to make the compromise for the big savings. It's also lighter and smaller than the production version. If you or anyone else is interested, email me about this special adaptor and I will put you in touch with the guy who builds them.

Hey Charles!

This is an old post, but do you think that thoses low cost prototypes are still available?

[Charles Papert]

Hi,

I'll be out of town until early May, but I'll check into it when I return.

best,

[Jean-Philippe Archibald]

Thank you very much Charles. My purshase can wait for some more weeks .

[Vincent Monton]

Hi,

Just back to 14x manual lenses for a moment.

Has anyone any preference between Fujinon 14X and Canon manual14x

I know they are considered obsolete with the new 16x manual out- but going quite cheap - so good value

Sorry if this has been covered before- I'm new on the site.

Vincent

[Jean-Philippe Archibald]

I never used the fujinon, but the Canon 14X have some advantages over the 16X. The price is a good one, and the fact that it is full manual, with the presence of an iris ring on the lens; with the 16x, you must use the small wheel on the camera.

[Vincent Monton]

One think going for the 16x manual Jean Phillipe is that I understand the new Century 16/9 anamorphic will only work with the latest lense because the front elements on the older 14X- both Fujinon and canon- rotate for focusing.

Something else to consider for the future


--Vincent

[Charles Papert]

Hi Vincent:

The anamorphic consideration would be a deal-breaker for the 14x, yes; but any other might not be (filters can be managed through a mattebox) and there is, to my mind, a major advantage of having a traditional iris ring vs the electronic control on the 16x. I'm a sworn Canon 14x lens fan, particularly for the price you can get it for now.

(p.s. currently on holiday enjoying your lovely city as I write this!)