Marty Hudzik
August 6th, 2004, 08:34 AM
This is to anyone who can answer but I know that Chris stated it somewhere but I can't find it now.
Is there a problem using the original XL1 Century optic wide angle adapter with the XL2? I had one before and it only cost $340 or something like that. It wasn't full zoom through but in the widest position it really helped! I think it was a .65 or something.
Anyway, I was thinking of getting one of these for the XL2 when I get it. I know that adapters on the end of the lens can distort the image and even cause it to degrade a little. But my sole use for this is for the few "event videography" gigs I still do. These clients don't care about image integrity that much so it is not an issue.
Can someone clarify what the problem would be with using one of these for the XL2? And if possible present some alternatives?
I was originally thinking the 3x canon lens but the cost is prohibitive and users are saying the image is soft, especially compared to the new XL2 lens. So I can't see investing in that at this time.
Thanks.
Is there a problem using the original XL1 Century optic wide angle adapter with the XL2? I had one before and it only cost $340 or something like that. It wasn't full zoom through but in the widest position it really helped! I think it was a .65 or something.
Anyway, I was thinking of getting one of these for the XL2 when I get it. I know that adapters on the end of the lens can distort the image and even cause it to degrade a little. But my sole use for this is for the few "event videography" gigs I still do. These clients don't care about image integrity that much so it is not an issue.
Can someone clarify what the problem would be with using one of these for the XL2? And if possible present some alternatives?
I was originally thinking the 3x canon lens but the cost is prohibitive and users are saying the image is soft, especially compared to the new XL2 lens. So I can't see investing in that at this time.
Thanks.