EF Lens use...att Larry Olsen esp.
Just when I thought I had the answer! There is always another factor!
Thank you, esp. Larry Olsen and I found your original inquiry and the replys from others. Today I was looking at the EF 70-200L f2.8 (fixed) IS USM Lens.
Any comment about using this with a doubler on the front if avail..Century? as opposed to the 100-400L zoom same price here in Australia.
How many f/stops do you lose with the EF adapter?
The deer I film in NZ and Australia are nearly nocturnal and light is constantly a problem.
I would not normally pan at long focal lengths, so would the stabilizer "do its job" for wind and "heartbeat pounding" whilst turned on, even with tripod mount?
My aunt and uncle have a house there in Cowes, probably right next door to you.
You won't lose F stops with the EF Adapter, the only thing that changes is the focal length.
Further to part of my last message...do you lose any light with EF adapter?
Chris, the "hunting" this lens does is similar to what happens with the stock lens when OIS is turned on and the camera is mounted on a tripod, only much more pronounced. So I'm not sure if it is possible to use any lens with the IS turned on while mounted on a tripod. Anyway, I just leave the IS off. Plus it is much easier to focus this lens compared to the stock 16x.
Even with this problem I have had some excellent results with the lens and I needed as much telephoto as I could get without turning it into a telescope. The main thing that helped was using a much sturdier tripod. I switched from a Bogen 503 to a Libec H60 made by Mathews and some good sticks.
Rick, there is no f stop loss with the EF adapter. The 100-400mm lens is 4.5 to 5.6 and that range is available when mounted on the Xl1.
There is still a certain amount of "hunting" even without panning. It also is more pronounced at the extreme telephoto. I just leave the IS off and learn how to breath right.
I don't have any experience with the Century doublers but the more glass you put in between the lens and the chip the more you will effect the overall quality of the pix. The quality of the picture from the 100-400mm is excellent.
I was considering the canon EF adapter..
Will i be able to use any SLR lense?
I have a 50-200mm zoom and a standard 50mm i want to use..
To use the EF adapter you have to use an EF-compatible lens.
As to depth of field, you will get the depth of field associated with the lens, by the field of view will also correspond to that focal length. What this means is that a 200 mm lens will produce a field of view that is similar to a 1400 mm telephone on at 35 mm still camera. The 50mm similar to a 350 mm telephoto.
i assume EF lenses are readily available to buy individually?
have to shoot from far away to get the close up i would need.
EF lenses are Canon lenses specifically for their EOS range of SLR cameras. They are buy no means a cheap lens. The widest lens in the EF range is a 14mm ultra ultra wide and will set you back around US$2200 + the EOS adapter. This will yeld aprox 105mm in 35mm terms.
In my opinion you'd be better off just getting the 3x wide lens made for the XL1. For more info read the Pappas Method article on the Watchdog.
Hello, I will buy a Xl1S very soon, but I can't afford to buy the manual X16 Zoom (but I want a manual/mechanical focus).
there is the 7.2X factor on the adaptor.
Due to the 7.2x multiplication factor of the focal length, using a Canon EOS lens on the XL1 will prevent you from doing any kind of serious indoor close-up work, unless you can position the camera from a long way away, down a long hall or several rooms over. Plus you'll need to add a lot of light. This particular set-up is best suited for outdoor long-distance wildlife or surveillance work. You'll have a difficult time using it indoors, and the close-ups will be *extreme* as in microscopic.
I've got a 28/70 and a 70/300, but I'm ready to buy a 15/80 or else if I can find a way to compensate the 7.2X adapter factor with a 0.3X converter or else.
In this particular case, I will have a 32/172 fully manual lens without the cost of the canon manual 16X, and added possibilities of the Eos adapter.
It sounds to me a pretty good solution, except I need to find a 0.3 converter which can be fit onto a widezoom photo lens.
I don't think something bigger (like a 0.2 converter :-) ) is existing.
Last edited by Hitcher.; March 2nd, 2002 at 02:17 AM.
I'm not sure if Canon have a 15-80 EF lens. The widest Zoom I'm aware of is a 16-35mm and it costs around the same as the 16x Manual Servo Lens. If I'm wrong please point me in the direction of the 15-80 as I'd be interested in it for my still work.
Everyone speak of the 7.2x focal length multiplier, as if it were a teleconverter.
Actually, the focal length remains essentailly the same, it is just that most lenses intended for a 35mm still camera are rather longer focal length than the video lenses used with the 1/3" CCD so the CCD sees a much narrower field of view. When enlarged to the same image size on the display it has a telephoto sort of effct.