Fujinon 1/2" lens at DVinfo.net

Mark Silva · August 22nd, 2006, 11:37 AM

I've got a Fujinon 1/2" SD Lens from a sony block camera.
12x7.5 model # VCL-712BXEA

Would this work as a good alternative to the stock Fujinon 16x that it comes with if I get the 1/3 to 1/2 adapter?

I seem to recall this lens producing some great images when it was in use.

Does anyone here own the adapter?
Is it just a piece of milled aluminum?

Chris Hurd · August 22nd, 2006, 12:32 PM

I don't think it's going to resolve properly for High Definition... probably too soft for HD.

Mark Silva · August 22nd, 2006, 02:29 PM

ah ok.

thanks for the tip.

Carl Martin · August 22nd, 2006, 05:35 PM

I have the adapter 2/3 to 1/3 and use my lens and it is much better then the stock lens. The adapter is I believe made of steel, but not sure, it is very strong and sturdy.

Stephan Ahonen · August 22nd, 2006, 06:39 PM

Remember that sticking a 1/2" lens on a 1/3" camera results in a huge loss of field of view. A 7.5mm minimum focal length is going to be far too telephoto for general use (see: people who complain about the stock lens not being wide enough at 5mm).

Guy Barwood · August 22nd, 2006, 07:19 PM

I wouldn't be suprised if most 1/2" lens will perform as well as the stock lens (optically). At about $800, the stock lens really isn't exactly a HD lens itself. After all it is cheaper than almost any 1/2" SD lens on the market...

Makes me think my 1/2" Canon 16x 7mm which is very much an economy SD lens (about US$1200) would work well enough on a HD100 for local sports where reach is much more helpful than getting wide and lets face it, the clients arn't exactly the fussiest.

Jay Yellamaty · August 22nd, 2006, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Martin

I have the adapter 2/3 to 1/3 and use my lens and it is much better then the stock lens. The adapter is I believe made of steel, but not sure, it is very strong and sturdy.

Carl, can you please tell me where you got the lens adapter and how much it costs ? I have two fujinon lenses, one for 1/2" and the other for 2/3'. I would love to see if they are better than the stock lens on the HD 100, although for my current shooting needs the stock lens is more than adequate. But I'm hoping the other lens might give me better resolution and maybe a wider field of view. Thanks.

Guy Barwood · August 22nd, 2006, 08:04 PM

Your not going to get a wider field of view out of a 1/2" lens, let alone a 2/3" lens. As the sensor is 1/3", only a smaller section the image produced by lens is captured by the sensor resulting in a crop effect (commly refered to as a multiplification effect as well).

eg: With a 35mm lens, the multiplication factor is about 7x. So a 35mm lens on a HD100 will appear in zoom (Field of view) to be about 245mm on a 35mm SLR. 1/2" and 2/3" lens have less zoom but it is still there. Someone else might chip in with their factors.

Stephan Ahonen · August 22nd, 2006, 08:19 PM

Not sure how it translates into focal length multipliers, but a 1/3" chip will give you 66.6...% of the field of view of a 1/2" lens and 50% of the field of view of a 2/3" lens.

Mark Silva · August 24th, 2006, 10:16 AM

ok, so what 1/2" lens would be used ideally for the 1/3" to 1/2" adapter?

Stephan Ahonen · August 24th, 2006, 02:31 PM

One that comes back to at least 5 mm on the wide end, preferably.

Canon has a few, but they're mostly in the $25k and up range.

This one is only $6,200, or $9,200 with a 2x extender, but isn't much wider than the stock and doesn't have much telephoto to it.

I'm still waiting for the adaptor that will let me stick a real lens on this camera. =D

Carl Martin · August 25th, 2006, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay Yellamaty

Carl, can you please tell me where you got the lens adapter and how much it costs ? I have two fujinon lenses, one for 1/2" and the other for 2/3'. I would love to see if they are better than the stock lens on the HD 100, although for my current shooting needs the stock lens is more than adequate. But I'm hoping the other lens might give me better resolution and maybe a wider field of view. Thanks.

I got it at Abel Cine Tech. 2/3-1/3 costs $699. I think.

I use my 2/3 SD Fuji lens on the HD100 and the images are awesome, much better then the stock lens and a bit wider. It is worth the purchase.

Mark Silva · August 25th, 2006, 10:40 AM

Carl which lens is that?

Daniel Weber · August 25th, 2006, 01:40 PM

I believe that he is talking about the JVC 2/3" to 1/3" lens adaptor.

Oops, realized you were talking about his Fuji lens not the adaptor, my bad.

Dan Weber

Carl Martin · August 25th, 2006, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Silva

Carl which lens is that?

A20x8.6BERM-SD

August 22nd, 2006, 11:37 AM	#1
Mark Silva Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Pacific NW Posts: 431	Fujinon 1/2" lens I've got a Fujinon 1/2" SD Lens from a sony block camera. 12x7.5 model # VCL-712BXEA Would this work as a good alternative to the stock Fujinon 16x that it comes with if I get the 1/3 to 1/2 adapter? I seem to recall this lens producing some great images when it was in use. Does anyone here own the adapter? Is it just a piece of milled aluminum?

August 22nd, 2006, 12:32 PM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	I don't think it's going to resolve properly for High Definition... probably too soft for HD. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

August 22nd, 2006, 02:29 PM	#3
Mark Silva Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Pacific NW Posts: 431	ah ok. thanks for the tip.

August 22nd, 2006, 05:35 PM	#4
Carl Martin Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: New York Posts: 164	I have the adapter 2/3 to 1/3 and use my lens and it is much better then the stock lens. The adapter is I believe made of steel, but not sure, it is very strong and sturdy.

August 22nd, 2006, 06:39 PM	#5
Stephan Ahonen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 512	Remember that sticking a 1/2" lens on a 1/3" camera results in a huge loss of field of view. A 7.5mm minimum focal length is going to be far too telephoto for general use (see: people who complain about the stock lens not being wide enough at 5mm).

August 22nd, 2006, 07:19 PM	#6
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	I wouldn't be suprised if most 1/2" lens will perform as well as the stock lens (optically). At about $800, the stock lens really isn't exactly a HD lens itself. After all it is cheaper than almost any 1/2" SD lens on the market... Makes me think my 1/2" Canon 16x 7mm which is very much an economy SD lens (about US$1200) would work well enough on a HD100 for local sports where reach is much more helpful than getting wide and lets face it, the clients arn't exactly the fussiest.

August 22nd, 2006, 08:04 PM	#8
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	Your not going to get a wider field of view out of a 1/2" lens, let alone a 2/3" lens. As the sensor is 1/3", only a smaller section the image produced by lens is captured by the sensor resulting in a crop effect (commly refered to as a multiplification effect as well). eg: With a 35mm lens, the multiplication factor is about 7x. So a 35mm lens on a HD100 will appear in zoom (Field of view) to be about 245mm on a 35mm SLR. 1/2" and 2/3" lens have less zoom but it is still there. Someone else might chip in with their factors.

August 22nd, 2006, 08:19 PM	#9
Stephan Ahonen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 512	Not sure how it translates into focal length multipliers, but a 1/3" chip will give you 66.6...% of the field of view of a 1/2" lens and 50% of the field of view of a 2/3" lens.

August 24th, 2006, 10:16 AM	#10
Mark Silva Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Pacific NW Posts: 431	ok, so what 1/2" lens would be used ideally for the 1/3" to 1/2" adapter?

August 24th, 2006, 02:31 PM	#11
Stephan Ahonen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 512	One that comes back to at least 5 mm on the wide end, preferably. Canon has a few, but they're mostly in the $25k and up range. This one is only $6,200, or $9,200 with a 2x extender, but isn't much wider than the stock and doesn't have much telephoto to it. I'm still waiting for the adaptor that will let me stick a real lens on this camera. =D

August 25th, 2006, 10:40 AM	#13
Mark Silva Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Pacific NW Posts: 431	Carl which lens is that?

August 25th, 2006, 01:40 PM	#14
Daniel Weber Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Maryland, USA Posts: 696	I believe that he is talking about the JVC 2/3" to 1/3" lens adaptor. Oops, realized you were talking about his Fuji lens not the adaptor, my bad. Dan Weber