Dear DVi Community,

I am Barrett Bilotta, president of XL1Solutions. Our company specializes in developing XL-1 mount adaptors that allow the XL-1 camera to accept a large variety of film lenses, enabling the XL-1 user to acquire a “film look”. We are presently featured on XL-1 Watchdog, “What’s New”, NAB 2003 Trade Show.

Our most popular adaptor is the XL-1 to Arriflex PL mount, which allows the XL-1 camera to use all PL mounted film lenses, whether it be 35mm, 16mm or Super 16mm, Cooke, Ziess, or Angenieux. We also have an XL-1 to Nikon adaptor that allows the XL-1 to accept Nikon mounted lenses. Our most recent adaptor is the XL-1 to Canon EF lens adaptor. EOS mounted lenses can be used with the XL-1 but with only a 1.5X- 2X effect, vs. a 7x effect. My company has also developed a mount that allows Russian Konvas and Lomo 35MM motion picture lenses to be used with an Arri PL mount.

In addition to our mounts we sell 15mm rods and base plates built for the XL-1. Also available are complete turnkey XL-1 filmmaker packages. Currently we are working upon an extension viewfinder for the XL-1 camera.

Please see our site http://www.xl1solutions.com where you can view out takes from a Canon commercial shot by Canon USA Inc., using our mount with film lenses. Also you will see sample images shot with Angenieux and Nikon lenses.


Sincerely

Barrett Bilotta

Thanks for posting Barrett, I'm sure there are some people here that didn't know you were around.


Since you're posting here, is there any discount for Watchdog members for your products? Any specials coming up?


Hey, it never hurts to ask. Right ? (G)

Barrett,

If at all possible could you explain briefly how you manage to reduce the magnification factor and if there is any effect on image quality?

Will there be any solutions for different camera's? such as the dvx100 or the pd150?

Zac

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Burnfield : Thanks for posting Barrett, I'm sure there are some people here that didn't know you were around.


Since you're posting here, is there any discount for Watchdog members for your products? Any specials coming up?


Hey, it never hurts to ask. Right ? (G) -->>>

Kevin,
Currently on ebay we have 2 adaptors for $399 vs. $499. Here is the link to that auction http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2935903470&category=4691&rd=1 However for anyone in the DV community we will offer the XL-1 to Arri PL mount for the same price of $399. Just get in touch with me directly.
Thanks
Barrett

<<<-- Originally posted by Adrian Douglas : Barrett,

If at all possible could you explain briefly how you manage to reduce the magnification factor and if there is any effect on image quality? -->>>

Hi Adrian,
Here is a brief summary of the XL-1 to Arri PL mount adaptor. That should answer some of your questions. Also there is no effect on image quality.



The XL-1 to Arriflex Lens Adaptor is a mechanical mount that enables the cinematographer to use Arriflex PL lenses with the Canon XL-1/XLls. It is made of high quality stainless steel and can be used with any Arri PL mounted 35MM motion picture lenses as well as 16MM and super 16MM: Cooke, Zeiss, or Angenieux. The adaptor allows the lens to be seated at the proper distance from the film plane, in the case of the XL-1 the distance from the CCD. It enables the lens to perform well, giving a sharp image. Since the adaptor lets the cinematographer use motion picture lenses made of higher quality glass than video lenses, one can see the difference in the quality of the image.

When using the adaptor with either 16MM or 35MM lenses, the (DOF) depth of field is preserved, and it effectively increases the focal length of the PL mounted lens by 2x. Most DP's agree that having a 2x effect is beneficial because you are using the best part of the lens, the center. In essence, one gets a 2x extender and a PL mount for $495.00. However, since this is a new product, we have not, to date done extensive testing on a variety of lenses. We have not experienced any focus problems or vignetting. We have used the mount with our 35MM Super Speed Optar T1.4 lens and the results were cinematically beautiful.

Thanks Barrett, I think I read something like that on your site though. I'm more interested in how you overcame the problem of CCD size and how that is the major factor influencing the magnification factor.

Hi Barrett,

You are in Waltham, yes? I am in Davis Square, we are neighbors! Iv'e been meaning to touch base with you for some time now, been so distracted though, you know how it gets sometimes.

I'm very impressed with your XL adaptor, had a fun time showing it off in the Canon booth at NAB. I'm going to be in LA for the ETW SHOW this week, again working in the Canon booth. We should meet sometime and compare setups, I'm very interested in using some of your stuff on my next project. I also am very interested in meeting you and talking shop.

What's your favorite lens to use with your XL adaptor? Do you have any suggestions for a wide angle field of view? Do you have any suggestions for an anamorphic solution?

Let's keep in touch, you can also email me directly if you wish. Just very busy here trying to do way too many things today before I fly out tomorrow morning!

- don

Wow, impressive stuff and fairly affordable.

I have Canon EOS adapter and its frustrating as hell...

and the P+S Teknik or whatever-it's-called is way out of my price range and not avail. to rent here in Toronto...

so your products are a welcome sigh of relief and maybe now I might stick with the XL1 system...

I have a friend who owns a bunch of NIkon lenses that I could probably get to use - very very interesting....

Wonder when Canon will buy you out? Just kidding!

Mark, I'm thinking of the Canon EOS adaptor. What do you mean that "it's as frustrating as hell"? Picture quality? Handling? Or other?

Cheers!

i suppose he means the 7.2X magnification from the adapter. whatever lense do you use, it quite always a telephoto lense

Barrett:

I'm intrigued by the PL adaptor and the minimal magnification effect, but I am curious about the field of view differences between a 16mm and 35mm designated lens. For instance, a 16mm format 12mm lens is going to have half the field of view of a 35mm format 12mm lens due to the difference in target size; what would the magnifaction factor be on both lenses when used with your adaptor? As a specific choice (since it is a reasonably priced lens to find used), what would be the equivalent focal length created when using the illustrated 12-120 lens?

i suppose he means the 7.2X magnification from the adapter. whatever lense do you use, it quite always a telephoto lenseI shoot wildlife. So far from being a drawback, the 7.2 magnification would be a boon. If that's what Mark does indeed mean, it wouldn't be a problem for me.

Which is why I asked him for clarification.

<<<-- Originally posted by Adrian Douglas : Thanks Barrett, I think I read something like that on your site though. I'm more interested in how you overcame the problem of CCD size and how that is the major factor influencing the magnification factor. -->>>


Hi Adrian,
Basically people get confused between the difference of a mechanical mount adaptor and a optical adaptor. The chip on the camera reads what the lens sees nothing more. If its a high quality lens its going to see a high quality image. You get the 2x effect because of the distance the lens is being held from the CCDs. Your also getting the center of the lens, the better part.
Thanks
Barrett

<<<-- Originally posted by Don Berube : Hi Barrett,

You are in Waltham, yes? I am in Davis Square, we are neighbors! Iv'e been meaning to touch base with you for some time now, been so distracted though, you know how it gets sometimes.

I'm very impressed with your XL adaptor, had a fun time showing it off in the Canon booth at NAB. I'm going to be in LA for the ETW SHOW this week, again working in the Canon booth. We should meet sometime and compare setups, I'm very interested in using some of your stuff on my next project. I also am very interested in meeting you and talking shop.

What's your favorite lens to use with your XL adaptor? Do you have any suggestions for a wide angle field of view? Do you have any suggestions for an anamorphic solution?

Let's keep in touch, you can also email me directly if you wish. Just very busy here trying to do way too many things today before I fly out tomorrow morning!

- don -->>>

Hi Don,
I am actually located in Westford just outside of Boston. I would like to talk to you more but I am out of town also. As for an Anamorphic solution I got it! My favorite lens to use with the XL-1 Adaptor is my Super Fast Optar 35mm Film lens. And the Cooke 18mm wide angle fixed prime. For the wide I am using the 18mm Cooke. Keep in touch when you catch up.
Thanks
Barrett

<<<-- Originally posted by Mark Kubat : Wow, impressive stuff and fairly affordable.

I have Canon EOS adapter and its frustrating as hell...

and the P+S Teknik or whatever-it's-called is way out of my price range and not avail. to rent here in Toronto...

so your products are a welcome sigh of relief and maybe now I might stick with the XL1 system...

I have a friend who owns a bunch of NIkon lenses that I could probably get to use - very very interesting....

Wonder when Canon will buy you out? Just kidding! -->>>
Hi Mark,
Your not the only one thats excited and sees the potential. Canon has been showing our product line at NAB in Vegas and now this month in New York City. I don't think we will get bout out or do I want to :)
Thanks
Barrett
P.S. Keep this secret we are making another mount for a Sont 2/3 B4 Bayonet mount that will take.....guess what??......motion picture lenses.

the quality is beautiful. But unless you are making a movie about talking noses, the application is limited. Okay, you can try filming from the next room or from outside through the window (across a soccer field maybe?)

I sound flippant but I scarcely fathom to guess what Canon was thinking when they first launched their camcorder with "interchangeable lenses" and especially the EOS adaptor. Okay, I perhaps am too harsh... I have used it and love the quality - it's just the 7.2x factor is murder! Step down rings and wide adaptors mean you lose stops, etc.

Now with this latest offering, there is real promise for indie filmmakers to have pro Sundance-worthy results while still operating on car-wash-fundraiser budgets.

Hey, isn't that how everyone here gets their money?

Oh, Nigel, now I read you do wildlife stuff - then you definitely want the Canon EOS adaptor! All my stuff with it looks like it's for Mutual of Omaha - tiny depth of field, super-telephoto like it was shot while on Safari in the Serengeti - problem is I shoot narrative movies with actors and only RARELY does the shot call for them to do a convincing impersonation of a pygmy hippopotamus in heat...

Hey, am I the first one in all these forums to use the word "hippopotamus?" Somebody do a search!

Geez Mark,

Place the Canon Manual/ Servo 16X lens in front of your XL1S and then you will appreciate the benefit of having the ability to change lenses with the XL mount.

Which lens do you mainly use?

- don

Cheers, looks like the EOS adapter gives good quality if you can live with the magnification. I can.

Thanks again.

<<<-- Originally posted by Charles Papert : Barrett:

I'm intrigued by the PL adaptor and the minimal magnification effect, but I am curious about the field of view differences between a 16mm and 35mm designated lens. For instance, a 16mm format 12mm lens is going to have half the field of view of a 35mm format 12mm lens due to the difference in target size; what would the magnifaction factor be on both lenses when used with your adaptor? As a specific choice (since it is a reasonably priced lens to find used), what would be the equivalent focal length created when using the illustrated 12-120 lens? -->>>

Hi Charles,
You correct 35mm gives you more image then the 16mm. Its 2x effect. As for the Angenieux 12-120 it would be a 24-240mm lens. No matter if it is a 16mm lens or a 35mm lens it still has a 2x effect. Did you see the photos taken with the 12-120 Angenieux on our site?
Thanks
Barrett
Anymore questions get back to me. I am out of town but I will get back to you.

Barrett, please bear with me if that's OK.

If I understand correctly, you are suggesting that the adaptor has a 2x magnification of field of view. Let's imagine we place a 25mm Cooke S4 on an Arri 435. Now we move that lens to an SR3, and we find that it has magnified by a factor of 2, netting the same field of view as a 50mm would have on the 435. Then we move the lens onto your adaptor on an XL1. What would be the comparable lens on the 435 at this point? Still a 50mm, or would it now be yielding the same size image as a 100mm?

The overwhelming reason (based on what I have read on this forum) that folks seem to be interested in the Mini 35 is the shallow depth of field characteristic, not as much the optical quality*. If your product is able to approach this goal at an obviously more attractive price point, I'm sure you will do very well.

To that end, may I make a recommendation about the pictures on the site? How about setting up up a demanding focus situation that has multiple planes (foreground objects, midground subject, background objects) and photographing the exact same image size with both your adaptor + cine lens as well as a stock CanonXL1 lens; then posting the results next to each other. I think if people can see the that the adaptor will deliver more shallow results, they will be impressed. Listing the specs of the images (focal length, aperture etc) would be helpful also.

* regarding optical quality: the Angeniux 12-120, while historically a workhouse, is not exactly an optical champ. It's been years since I'ved used them but as I recall they breathe significantly. With the advances in optics over the years, I would be surprised if it could outperform the Canon manual lenses for the XL1 in flare resistance and resolution--but that's merely conjecture on my part.

<<<-- Originally posted by Charles Papert : Barrett, please bear with me if that's OK.

If I understand correctly, you are suggesting that the adaptor has a 2x magnification of field of view. Let's imagine we place a 25mm Cooke S4 on an Arri 435. Now we move that lens to an SR3, and we find that it has magnified by a factor of 2, netting the same field of view as a 50mm would have on the 435. Then we move the lens onto your adaptor on an XL1. What would be the comparable lens on the 435 at this point? Still a 50mm, or would it now be yielding the same size image as a 100mm?

The overwhelming reason (based on what I have read on this forum) that folks seem to be interested in the Mini 35 is the shallow depth of field characteristic, not as much the optical quality*. If your product is able to approach this goal at an obviously more attractive price point, I'm sure you will do very well.

To that end, may I make a recommendation about the pictures on the site? How about setting up up a demanding focus situation that has multiple planes (foreground objects, midground subject, background objects) and photographing the exact same image size with both your adaptor + cine lens as well as a stock CanonXL1 lens; then posting the results next to each other. I think if people can see the that the adaptor will deliver more shallow results, they will be impressed. Listing the specs of the images (focal length, aperture etc) would be helpful also.

* regarding optical quality: the Angeniux 12-120, while historically a workhouse, is not exactly an optical champ. It's been years since I'ved used them but as I recall they breathe significantly. With the advances in optics over the years, I would be surprised if it could outperform the Canon manual lenses for the XL1 in flare resistance and resolution--but that's merely conjecture on my part. -->>>

Hi Charles,
Thanks for your inquiry about our product. To answer your questions about the 2x effect with the hypothetical example you gave: the 25MM Cooke would become a 50mm on the XL-1 with our mechanical adaptor, it would not be a 100MM. Canon USA shot a commercial with our adaptor. I assume you have seen the outtakes on our website www.xl1solutions.com They did a comparison between an 18MM Cooke which ended up being a 36MM lens, and our Super Fast Optar 35MM which ended up being 70MM.

As you know when you use the center of the lens you are getting the best part of the glass. Canon also shot for the purpose of comparison, with a Canon 16x video lens, and you can see the difference on our site.

You can also see on our web page sample images taken with the Mini 35MM adaptor. There are some outtakes from the feature film “Phreakers” that was shot with an XL-1 and the P+S Mini 35MM. You decide if I am close to the quality of a film look and depth of field with our mechanical mount.

Canon USA has taken our product line and our motion picture lenses to the Video Expo in NYC and previously to the NAB show in Vegas. I also have given Canon a Zeiss 10-100MM to try with the adaptor as well. We will have sample images on our site soon.

As far as your point about the 12-120 Angenieux lens, we both know it was a work horse in its day in the 70’s. They were $5000 then, and that was a lot of money. The reason that we use the 12-120 with the XL-1 for an example, is for two reasons. They are abundant in the market place and they are inexpensive now. If you wanted to start moving up to a 15-150 Angenieux or a 25-250 Angenieux, which we have, it starts to get expensive for the XL-1 user market. However, we will have samples as you recommended. Soon on our site a section of FAQ’s will be added and samples of images taken with a variety of lenses, film and video, 16MM and 35MM.

You mentioned the Canon lens; if you are talking about a Canon video lens compared to the Angenieux, the Angenieux out performs the Canon lens. If you are talking about a Canon still film lens, which you can use our EOS adaptor (over 50 different types of lenses) it performs equal to the Angenieux. I hope this answers all your questions. I look forward to further discussions. Wait until we get the Russian Lomo/Kovas 35mm motion picture lenses mounted with a PL. They have a beautiful look, not as hard as the Zeiss. I am hopeful that we can get these lenses to work with the XL-1 as well as Sony 2/3 bayonet.

Sincerely
Barrett Bilotta

re-reading it now I wonder if it's meant as a dig at the standard issue lens that comes in the XL1 package?

if so, I get your point. I've learned with difficulty how to live with it - hell, if I have to rack focus, I shoot and then use after effects to mask and blur in post!

don, i was trying to emphasize that 2x is heckuva a lot easier to live with than 7x and if it works and the price doesn't go up, then Barrett and co. are on to something big here.

Unless I win the Powerball, I wouldn't be able to properly appreciate the interchangeability advantages my XL1 potentially offers - the Teknik is an example - it's way more than the camera itself and the way I shoot my stuff on the road and all, I find it more practical to own my equipment (lenses and adaptors included) rather than renting.

Barrett's stuff would keep me in the game swinging with an XL1 in my hands!

I'd like to see some side by side DOF comparisons to the stock XL1 lens before I considered purchasing this product.

<<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : I'd like to see some side by side DOF comparisons to the stock XL1 lens before I considered purchasing this product. -->>>

Hi Dylan,
Actually now that you mention it we just put up on my website a side by side comparsion of images taken with the 16x lens and our adaptor with 18mm Cooke as well as 35mm Optar Please go to http://www.xl1solutions.com

Thanks
Barrett

I'm having trouble navigating your website. Can you give a specific page?

<<<-- Originally posted by Keith Loh : I'm having trouble navigating your website. Can you give a specific page? -->>>

Hi Keith,
Go to our main page www.xl1solutions.com click on adaptors and then click on sample photos taken with our adaptors. The first link on that page are the photos taken by Canon USA.
Thanks
Barrett

Thanks.

http://www.virtualcybervision.com/xl1/sample_outtakes_of_a_canon_comme.htm

Hi,

I have been reading through your thread, and I hate to ask just a STUPID question, but is this an adaptor that works via the P+S Mini35, or goes straight onto the XL1 and allows you to do without the Mini35?

I went tpo our website, but I couldn't really get it to function correctly, but that big as hell picture you have of the XL1 with the Mini 35 attached prompted my question.

Sorry for my technical stupidity.

Regards,
David Fisher

David

It goes straight to the XL1. Don't worry, there are no stupid questions here. Hope this helps,

Arg! I tried to view the web page listed earlier but all of the images that were shot with the film lenses were stretched vertically (but the ones that originated with the video lens weren't). I'm using Safari on OSX--is the problem on my end?

<<<-- Originally posted by Charles Papert : Arg! I tried to view the web page listed earlier but all of the images that were shot with the film lenses were stretched vertically (but the ones that originated with the video lens weren't). I'm using Safari on OSX--is the problem on my end? -->>>

Hi Charles,
I beleive it is your software we have not had any problems. Would you like me to e-mail you some of the photos? If I sent you an attachment what software would you use to open the photos?

Barrett

<<<-- Originally posted by David Lee Fisher : Hi,

I have been reading through your thread, and I hate to ask just a STUPID question, but is this an adaptor that works via the P+S Mini35, or goes straight onto the XL1 and allows you to do without the Mini35?

I went tpo our website, but I couldn't really get it to function correctly, but that big as hell picture you have of the XL1 with the Mini 35 attached prompted my question.

Sorry for my technical stupidity.

Regards,
David Fisher -->>>

Hi David,
It would help me if you could let me know what problems you had when you went to my website and if you are still having them now?

Thanks
Barrett

I am a weekend videographer and am planing to have a short movie for my church group.
After I viewed the sample shots with Cook lens and your adpater, I am interested in using them.

I have a question on the sample shorts:
Comparing to the shots with Cook lens, the shots with 16x Canon lens has more white burst area.
Are these results from same light setting? Even with 16x, can those white burst be avoidable by adjusting
light with zibra?

I have a XL1S PAL and like to have a price quote for a Arri PL Mount Adaptor and
Cooke Fixed Prime 18/35mm Lens. What other film lens can I use with your Arri PL Mount Adaptor with XL1S?

I also have a Nikon film lens (35mm) and a Sigma zoom lense(35-200) for my Nikon F4.
If I use your Nikon Fixed lens adapter with Nikon film lens, can I get the same video quality as Cooke Fixed Prime?
Do Canon film lens perform better for XL1S with the adapter than Nikon's?

How does Canon manual lens for XL1S perform compare to a film lense with adaper?

Maybe it's just me or the light settings used on those shots, but I don't see the extremely shallow dof that I'm used to seeing in 35mm for similar focal lengths (especially on the last few full close ups).

Barrett, I have also noticed on your website that you advertise the nikon adapter as yielding the same dof that is inherent in 35mm. Side by side, can one achieve the same dof with your nikon or PL adapters as can be achieved with the mini35 adapter (given the same focal lengths, distance, and light settings)? someone had asked a similar question in this thread before, but I didn't see a direct stratight answer to it.

I don't mean to offend anyone with my questions. I've just been considering purchasing the mini35 adapter, but of course with a price tag difference of almost $8K, I am more than willing to explore this option. I have seen what the mini35 can do, but I'm still not convinced that Barrett's adapters can do the same (which would be understandable, given the design differences between the adapters and price)...but believe me, I really, really, really want to be convinced otherwise.

Thx

<<<-- Originally posted by Jordi Ferre : Maybe it's just me or the light settings used on those shots, but I don't see the extremely shallow dof that I'm used to seeing in 35mm for similar focal lengths (especially on the last few full close ups).

Barrett, I have also noticed on your website that you advertise the nikon adapter as yielding the same dof that is inherent in 35mm. Side by side, can one achieve the same dof with your nikon or PL adapters as can be achieved with the mini35 adapter (given the same focal lengths, distance, and light settings)? someone had asked a similar question in this thread before, but I didn't see a direct stratight answer to it.

I don't mean to offend anyone with my questions. I've just been considering purchasing the mini35 adapter, but of course with a price tag difference of almost $8K, I am more than willing to explore this option. I have seen what the mini35 can do, but I'm still not convinced that Barrett's adapters can do the same (which would be understandable, given the design differences between the adapters and price)...but believe me, I really, really, really want to be convinced otherwise.

Thx -->>>

Hi,
No the dof is not the same. How did you get the idea that it is the same dof as the P+S Mini 35mm adaptor? Using motion picture lenses are better then video lenses as you can see. The P+S is a totally different animal. Read our writeup about the adaptor on our site.

Barrett

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Kim : I am a weekend videographer and am planing to have a short movie for my church group.
After I viewed the sample shots with Cook lens and your adpater, I am interested in using them.

I have a question on the sample shorts:
Comparing to the shots with Cook lens, the shots with 16x Canon lens has more white burst area.
Are these results from same light setting? Even with 16x, can those white burst be avoidable by adjusting
light with zibra?

I have a XL1S PAL and like to have a price quote for a Arri PL Mount Adaptor and
Cooke Fixed Prime 18/35mm Lens. What other film lens can I use with your Arri PL Mount Adaptor with XL1S?

I also have a Nikon film lens (35mm) and a Sigma zoom lense(35-200) for my Nikon F4.
If I use your Nikon Fixed lens adapter with Nikon film lens, can I get the same video quality as Cooke Fixed Prime?
Do Canon film lens perform better for XL1S with the adapter than Nikon's?

How does Canon manual lens for XL1S perform compare to a film lense with adaper? -->>>
Hi Steve wanted to make sure you got my response,

Thank you for your interest in our products. You asked about comparing the shots with the Cooke lens and the 16X Canon Lens. The lightness of the image shot with the 16X could be brought down with some filters. But more importantly in the comparison is the richness and the depth of field that you can get with film lenses. You asked about other lenses which could be used with our Arri XL 1 to PL Mount - take a look at our web site and see a sampling of lenses and images: Cooke, Angenieux, Zeiss, varieity of primes, telephoto, and zoom lenses. The lenses have to have an Arri Standard Mount to use our Adaptor.

You asked about a comparsion between your Nikon and a Cooke. The Cooke 18MM prime was an expensive lens in its day so the optics were better. However, if you use a high quality Nikon lens you can get a very good quality image. You mentioned Canon film lenses. Any decent motion picture lens helps with the quality.

As far as a Nikon Mount at this time we have about a two week back order. As far as a trial, if you want a NIkon vs. a XL1 to PL mount (which we currently have in stock) you could buy it and try it for seven days, and then if not satisfied, return it with a 20% restocking charge.

The super fast Optar lens are hard to find and are expensive. However you can find a lot of Angenieux and Cooke lenses on Ebay. You just have to do some shopping.

And yes the adaptor works with the Angenieux and the Optar.

<<<-- Originally posted by Jordi Ferre : Maybe it's just me or the light settings used on those shots, but I don't see the extremely shallow dof that I'm used to seeing in 35mm for similar focal lengths (especially on the last few full close ups).

Barrett, I have also noticed on your website that you advertise the nikon adapter as yielding the same dof that is inherent in 35mm. Side by side, can one achieve the same dof with your nikon or PL adapters as can be achieved with the mini35 adapter (given the same focal lengths, distance, and light settings)? someone had asked a similar question in this thread before, but I didn't see a direct stratight answer to it.

I don't mean to offend anyone with my questions. I've just been considering purchasing the mini35 adapter, but of course with a price tag difference of almost $8K, I am more than willing to explore this option. I have seen what the mini35 can do, but I'm still not convinced that Barrett's adapters can do the same (which would be understandable, given the design differences between the adapters and price)...but believe me, I really, really, really want to be convinced otherwise.

Thx -->>>


P.S. The P+S Mini 35mm is a optical adaptor we make a mechanincal adaptor to allow you to use film lenses. But you get a much better quality than video lenses.

OK, so the XL1 solutions adapter DOES NOT yield the same shallow DOF as the mini35 does (or as seen in 35mm lenses).

You might want to correct/clarify the verbiage for your adapters found on your website:

"When using the adaptor with either 16MM or 35MM lenses, the (DOF) depth of field is preserved..."

(I'm assuming now that you're talking about the DOF preserved in a video lens/xl1s camera combination, not the DOF that you would expect in a 35mm lens/35mm camera combo).

Please correct me if I misunderstood your response to my previous post.

<<<-- Originally posted by Jordi Ferre : OK, so the XL1 solutions adapter DOES NOT yield the same shallow DOF as the mini35 does (or as seen in 35mm lenses).

You might want to correct/clarify the verbiage for your adapters found on your website:

"When using the adaptor with either 16MM or 35MM lenses, the (DOF) depth of field is preserved..."

(I'm assuming now that you're talking about the DOF preserved in a video lens/xl1s camera combination, not the DOF that you would expect in a 35mm lens/35mm camera combo).

Please correct me if I misunderstood your response to my previous post. -->>>


Hi Jordi,

The quote is correct. For example, when you see the 18mm Cooke lens, the adaptor will not interfere with the lens' depth of field. It is the same with the Optar, Angenieux, Zeiss etc. Nor does it interfere with any of the accessories on the XL-1 Let me suggest that you look at the picture on our website from "Phreakers" which was shot with the mini 35mm on the XL-1 Then take a look at what Canon USA shot for their commercial with my adaptor. We were as pleasantly surprised as they were with the quality. What we have experienced is, the quality of the glass in the lens determines the quality of the image you get, better quality lenes get better results.

Thanks
Barrett

Hi Barrett. Thanks for your reply.

Not to be the spirit of contradiction, but I still disagree with the marketing statement for your adapters on your website. DOF is not a product of just the lens being used. In video, DOF is a by-product of the size of the camera's CCD, the distance between the lens and the CCD, and the lens being used (primarily. other factors may also influence DOF)

You can't say that a lens has a particular DOF and therefore it is preserved when using your adapter (I have never seen DOF as one of the technical specs in any film or video lens), because that may lead people to believe that they might get the dof that they would get in 35mm.

I agree with you 100% on the quality of the lens aspect of it though. Thx again.

I wanted to let the DV community know that we have some auctions going on at ebay.com, we have our XL-1 to PL mount at $349.00 but only three available at that price. As well as some other items. Our ebay name is XL1Solutions


Thanks
Barrett
XL1Solutions

Hi,
I am considering to buy Barrett's adapter for Canon EOS lenses. Is there somebody on the list who already bought this adapter and is willing to post some frames of shots taken with his/her XL1(s) using this particular adapter ?
It will be highly appreciated !

Hans den Hertog, Lathum, the Netherlands

<<<-- Originally posted by Hans_den_Hertog : Hi,
I am considering to buy Barrett's adapter for Canon EOS lenses. Is there somebody on the list who already bought this adapter and is willing to post some frames of shots taken with his/her XL1(s) using this particular adapter ?
It will be highly appreciated !

Hans den Hertog, Lathum, the Netherlands -->>>

Hi Hans,
I should have some sample photos taken with the EOS to XL-1 lens adaptor posted on our website soon. I will let you and the community know when the photos are up.
Thanks
Barrett

Recently National Georgraphic used our Nikon to XL-1 mount in a shoot in Africa. I am currently seeking permission from them for a sampling of out takes from their shoot, so that they can be posted on our website. We will keep you informed.

Thanks,
Barrett

Barrett,

Have you considered letting Chris Hurd (this message board's owner/operater) demo some of your adaptors, and allow him to do a write up for the members of this board in the articles section :

http://www.dvinfo.net/articles/index.php

Chris has been able to give us much insight into many of the wonderful products on the market (such as yours), and allow different individuals to see how a particular product can apply to their unique needs, and ways of shooting.

From both a questions/answers standpoint, and pure product promotion, allowing Chris to review the product would be a great course of action. I think there are many active users that would agree.

Thanks for keeping new innovative products coming for our gear!

-Brad

<<<-- Originally posted by Brad Herbert : Barrett,

Have you considered letting Chris Hurd (this message board's owner/operater) demo some of your adaptors, and allow him to do a write up for the members of this board in the articles section :

http://www.dvinfo.net/articles/index.php

Chris has been able to give us much insight into many of the wonderful products on the market (such as yours), and allow different individuals to see how a particular product can apply to their unique needs, and ways of shooting.

From both a questions/answers standpoint, and pure product promotion, allowing Chris to review the product would be a great course of action. I think there are many active users that would agree.

Thanks for keeping new innovative products coming for our gear!

-Brad -->>>

Hi Brad,

David Castillo Senior Technical Representative of Canon USA shot the commercial with our Cooke 18mm and our Optar 35mm is now using our 8mm Fisheye lens. Images will be posted on our website as soon as I get my footage back. I will get Chris on the case.
Thanks
Barrett

I have been recieving inquires about trial periods or return poilcy about any of our mounts. Yes, a five day trial period. I will refund your money minus shipping. Make sure you have your lens ready to test the adaptor. The adaptor uses arri standard mounted lenses.

Thanks
Barrett

I will be shooting test footage with the XL1Solutions PL-XL mount adaptor July 30 - August 3 at the Woods Hole Film Festival in Cape Cod, Massachusetts.
http://woodsholefilmfestival.org

I'll be shooting with an Angenieux 15-150mm lens and the Optar 35mm prime lens. Should have lots of sunlight and plenty of people and scenery to take footage of. Looking forward to it.

I will also be capturing that footage in the field with the new Focus Enhancements FireStore FS-3 http://www.focusinfo.com/products/firestore/firestore.htm and we will be using some of this footage during "Technology Day" at Woods Hole http://woodsholefilmfestival.org/archive/2003/2003workshop.html#course6-TechDay to demonstrate how the FS-3 can be incorporated into your workflow.

We will certainly keep our good friend Chris posted with images and feedback.

- don

That is good news, Don! Do keep us posted and good luck with
your shoots!