I thinking about to buy the XL 1.6 range extender but I want to use it on the Canon 14x manual lense with my XL1. As it's not really an XL lense i wanted to known if it's possible or not and any feedback will be useful.

Thank you in advance
Pierre

The Canon 14x manual lens is indeed an XL lens, and the 1.6x extender works perfectly with it. Hope this helps,

Hi Chris,

Hope all went swell out in Vegas for you. Sorry I couldn't
attend this year. Hope I didn't miss too much.

Hey, did you ever get to talk with any canon gurus about which
canon 35mm lens would be the best choice to use with XL1?

If not, is there someone who might know what canon thinks?

Hi,

I'm not sure what Canon thinks but I can give you some insight based on my experiences. I've been using Canon EOS EF lenses for 35mm since 1997. Prior to that I used Nikor lenses. Several Nikor lenses I used on my Betacam for wildlife documentaries. The first lens I used was the 35 - 350 Canon lens. The 10x range was great, and fairly versital considering the 7.2 conversion factor for magnification. The 35mm end becomes the equivlent to 250mm in 35mm terms. It's downside was weight and it wasn't very fast.

I've used the 70 - 200mm F2.8 (limited range and it did not balance well) 300mm F4 (very limited range, but some great shots combined with my 1.4x and 2x teleconvertors) 28 - 135 IS ( very good lens, extends the range of the 16x normal lens) is compact, sharp and fairly afordable.

My current favorite lens is the 100 - 400 IS. It balances very nicely, is faster than the 35 - 350, covers a great range and works with both my teleconvertors. I use it for long shots of birds on the water, nesting etc. anywhere I can't get close to my subject. I use the 28 - 135 IS for most of my flight shots. It gives me a better range as the hawks fly towards me. I loose them with the long lens.

Jeff

Jacques, hope we can hook up at some other event. Jeff's response has some pretty good feedback regarding EOS lenses. Hope that helps,

Thank Chris for answer about the XL 1,6.

Any ideas about the price for EF100-400 IS in US

If you want a US warranty expect to pay $1500 and up, give or take a few dollars. Grey market with International Warranty (No US warranty) are $1300 and up. As always buyer beware if you are not familiar with the dealer or the deal is just too good to be true.

Jeff

Thank for the indication for the price and the comments.

One more thing: with the lens EF100-400IS do you have really reach a good stabilization ? Because I use with a good tripod (cartoni) a 200 mm of Canon (fixed len) and i 'm always a bit disappointed by the bad stabilazation working outside with often some wind.
Best regards
Pierre

Hey Chris,

I might go to showbiz expo coming up in about a month.
You attending that show?

Back to glass. The 100-400IS is at the front of the line, but
I too am wondering about the advertised "3rd Generation"
image stabilizer, which is supposed to offer the choice of
vertical stabilization only, or both horizontal and vertical.

Does this lens offer that, and if so, vertical only is supposed to aid
when trying panning, though it still seems that at full zoom in,
a 3500mm would be almost impossible to pan and get anything
useable. Anyone?

Pierre,

I use the 1.6x with both the original 16x lens and the 14x manual lens. Love it! With either lens I get some Fantastic lunar shots, I don't think you'll be disappointed. The 16x goes to 1000mm and when you consider the size and weight of the 1.6 extender, why would you want to carry the extre weight. I have 2 Nikon F-5's and when I put my 500mm AF f/4.5 on it it weighs a ton. Pray tell,why would you want the nice, light XL-1 to be extremely front heavy and conspicuous?

These are only my thoughts on why I kove the 1.6x and how it works for me. Hope it helps.

Bruce

Hello Bruce,

Your comments are very relevants: the final weight with all the items are often very crucial for the mobility as I use my Xl1 mainly to film volcanic activity so I need all the stuff om my back.

Thank again
Pierre

Pierre,
Do you need a baggage boy?

Pierre,
At second thought, I'll use my 1.6 extender and video you from afar, running from the lava bombs.

Hey Bruce,

The only good way to film volcanoes it's when you heard hissing the volcanic bombs around you...to be serious (and i'm not paid by Canon or by anyone)the XL1 is rather strong and versatile because I used it in rough conditions (hot temperature, lot of dust....) and it keeps the way.
All the Best
Pierre

Howdy,

I am still wondering if _Canon_ recommends any lens like the
100-400?

Anyone going to show biz in LA June 1-3?

Jacques,

I'll see you at ShowBiz Expo for sure.

Canon doesn't recommend the 100-400 IS because of the way the IS works on that lens (differently than how IS works on other IS lenses). However, I know many XL1 shooters who *are* using this particular lens without complaints. There should be a whole thread about this particular lens in here somewhere.

See ya in L.A.,

While we're talking about the 100-400 mm IS lens, don't forget
the 75-300 mm IS. It's almost as good for bird footage, and costs a quarter as much. Also, as far as extenders, I have found that the EOS 2X positioned between the lens and the XL adapter gives a sharper image than the 1.6 X XL-1 extender (and is cheaper, too).

<SNIP>
> as far as extenders, I have found that the EOS 2X
>positioned between the lens and the XL adapter gives a sharper image
>than the 1.6 X XL-1 extender (and is cheaper, too).
-------------------

You lost me. I don't yet own an EOS adapter or that
EOS 2X extender. Seems like those items will cost more than the
1.6 extender, which is like what . . . $400?


& yes, the 1.6 is pretty soft. The 16X alone is soft enough for me, but
the 1.6 is even softer. Sometimes soft looks good. That said,
I would still prefer a MUCH sharper image as one can always blur it later.
Ah, pixel shift technology.

When is some camera company going to hook up three "cheap"
mega pixel CCDs and give us HD resolution for what it should cost?
I need feather detail :)

Meanwhile, I still love my XL1.

Sorry Jacques,
I assumed that you already used the EOS adapter ($450), because you can't mount a 100-400 zoom, or any other 35mm
lens without it.
At any rate, the images you get with EOS lenses and the adapter and an EOS extender are sharper than what you get with the 16X and the 1.6 extender.

I used the standard 16x lens with the 1.6 extender while videoing in the Amazon. I was videoing tree sloths...handheld, full zoom, against the sky, sitting in a moving boat. Image...magnificant! You have the best combo right there. Oh, I always shoot first in auto to get "a shot", then go full manual to get the great shots.