I am new to my GL-2. I will be video-ing lacrosse games; rather fast movement. I hope to edit and post highlights to my web site. Most games will be shot from the stands--a certain distance from the field. (1) Do I need a telephoto 2x lens for this use? How can one use a telephoto 2x lens with the GL-2 and avoid fumbling around with lens changes?
(3) For field level work, do I need a Glide Cam steadying unit?
Thanks.

There's lots of mixconceptions about 2x lenses. It doesn't turn the 20x optical zoom on your GL2 into 40x, it just makes it 2x...

Your GL2 has more then enough "zoom" to use...but i'd recommend trying to get closer to the action, there has to be a spot you can get to setup a tripod or whatever...

Do you need a Glide Cam? Of course not, but are you going to doing walking/running shots? If so, then a Glidecam might help...

Alex, I don't understand this, "It doesn't turn the 20x optical zoom on your GL2 into 40x, it just makes it 2x..."

I just tried a 2x at our Jessops here in London.

Grazie

A 2x telephoto extension or teleconverter as is known in photography, does turn a 20x lens into 40x. The trade off is that you lose 2 f stops.

Val thanks for that - I saw your most excellent Red Hawk images - yes? - This is what got me going on thinking about doing some distance wild life shooting. I do understand the expo thing, more glass = less lumins into the cammy - yes?

Alex, is there something I'm missing?

Grazie

Graham,
If you are referring to the Red-Tailed hawk stills and video by Steven Nunez....well they're not mine ;)....I do agree they are inspiring.
Can you provide details about the 2x teleconverter you tried?

Ooops, sorry - Senior Moment - and yes they are good.

Ermmm.. well... it was a Japanese 2x erm . . . it was only yesterday! Here I go again! - Give me time it'll come back - hopefully....

But why is Alex saying what he does? . . . confused . .

Grazie

If you are trying to follow action, 20x is challenging enough. I don't know how that would be possible with 40x. I would get a very good fluid head tripod and see what kind of results you can get out of the stock camera. If you get some professional looking accessories, like a good shotgun mic on top, etc. Often you can get into good places to shoot without too many questions. If you look the part, often people don't question it. I've had this happen often when I was trying to shoot events with my Nikon F100. The close you get, the better your video is going to look, as it reduces the accuracy required on the tripod to get the same shot.

Teleconverters are a case where you go for the highest quality glass you can afford. The two high end teleconverters I know of are

Sony - 1.7x (around US$270)
Century Optics - 2x (around US$400)

These do exactly what they say they do, double (or 1.7x) whatever focal length you are using. So, if you are maxed out at 20x (call it the 35mm equivalent of 790mm, a big lens already) then add a 2x you now have a 1580mm lens!

The functional zoom range for these is lessened as well (half?). If you open up too wide you get vignetting. Autofocus works so-so with the lens on, manual is a better bet.

Finally, there have been some complaints about the GL2 being frontheavy. Now imagine putting a huge chunk of glass on the front as well.....a tripod is a MUST.

I don't think I would want to track action with one of these on unless I really, really had to.

Sorry. I had read somewhere before that a addon 2x lens like that, doesn't do much, but double the focal length of the regular wide angle part of the lens on the camera -- not allowing you to zoom more. I guess they were completely wrong. :D

Gerald:

Regarding you thoughts about using a Glidecam or similar device for ground-level shooting: while some sports coverage does use this technology (European football/aka soccer), it's not all that practical for what you describe. The utility of being able to move down the sidelines is offset by having most of the action occur far enough away from the camera that you have to be on a telephoto lens to see it properly, which requires a pretty skilled operator. Also, trying to keep up with lacrosse players running up and down the field will probably tire most people out within a short period of time!

I worked on the broadcast of the World Cup a number of years ago, doing Steadicam on the sidelines. I was only responsible for covering 1/3 of the pitch, and only when the players were on my side which translated to mostly standing around with the rig for long stretches and then dashing around once they came my way; but it was still a strenuous affair, with often marginal results!

I think you would be best off with a camera fixed in the center, or better yet two cameras, one at each end by the goals.

The Sony 1.7X tele-lenses do throw the Canon GL2 balance off quite a bit- a tripod (as noted above) is a must (you'd want to use a tripod anyway for those long range shots).....

...but I gotta tell you guys- it opens up allot of shooting possibilities....and the OIS works well within the short ranges.....it's a "must have" accessory for anyone finding themselves shooting at the long end of their lens.
Highly recommended!

(they thread onto your front lens threads- so can be put on/off within 15 seconds or so)

Steve,
I'm wondering if the added weight creates any stress on the GL2's lens or lens housing. Also does the sony teleconverter comes with its own lens shade.

The Sony sort of has a shade in the outer metal of the lens body extends beyond the glass for protection. If you needed more shading or if you needed to add a matte box or filter it would take some real creativity since there are no threads (I don't think the Century Optics is threaded either).

I've had my teleconverter on most of the time for a two week trip in Australia and all of the time on a 10 day trip to Arizona and see no apparent problem. I don't know how the weight compares but the size doesn't seem to be that dis-similar to the wide angle lens that is a recommended accessory for the GL2.

I asked a Canon rep about a tele-converter and they said they considered 20x to be enough.

Yeah, right.

Canon is a major name in the camera business and is well aware of people putting on filters and add-on accessories on the front of their still and video cameras- I'm pretty sure it's perfectly fine to mount and use the teleconverters....but of course this is my opinion....I do it and don't worry about it at all......just be extra careful not to bang the add-on lens when mounted as it would give leverage to the shock.

The Sony has a small built-in lens hood- but not very effective as it's very small.

Jeff, Steve,
Given that you are adding more glass to the equation and in general that has a detrimental effect on the captured images, have you noticed any appreciable image degradation when shooting with the teleconverter?.

About the Century Optics 2X bayonet mounted on the XM2:

You get a black ring on the screen when you go to the wide angle side of the zoom (around 1/3 till the end of the wide angle side).

No hood provided, yes it is threaded and very good optical quality.

Best to all.
Ignacio

Hello,

I have used a Sony 1.7X converter on my PAL XM1 for two years now, without any detrimental effects to the camera, as far as I can see.

As I use the camera exclusively for bird photography, it is attached to the camera most of the time.

There is certainly vignetting at the wide end of the zoom, but there is not much point using the converter in those circumstances. If there is any image degradation it is not obvious - I never convert my material from miniDV to any other format.

Subjectively autofocus is slower to lock on, and when following a bird in flight viewed against the sky, focus is more easily lost, than without the converter. I do not think that the optical image stabilisation is anywhere near as effective as it is without the converter. I have taken to using shorter focal lengths when shooting and using the zoom filter in my DV500 editing set-up.

I use the camera on a set of Gitzo carbon fibre legs (G1127) with a Gitzo G2380 head. I cope with the front heavy problem by adding a Manfrotto Universal Sliding Plate between camera and head.

Hi Alan,
Do you use any filters between the lens and the Sony 1.7x teleconverter?

Flaring is not much of a problem with long lenses, unless the sun is low in the horizon in the direction you are pointing the camera. But if you are looking for an inexpensive solution to flares, take a look at the Flare Buster at http://www.flarebuster.com Originally designed to work with still cameras, it is just as effective with video cameras. Mounts to your accessory shoe, or, your tripod connection. It works especially well with wide lenses where flares really are a concern. A great gadget at a fair price.

Several of the early posters mentioned that adding a 2X tele-convertor would reduce the light by 2 stops. This is incorrect. If the convertor is attached at the front of the lens, no light is lost (actually a little is lost to internal reflection etc.). If the convertor is attached between the lens and the body (like the XL1 and 35mm cameras) then light is lost relative to the magnification. One stop is lost for 1.4X and 2 stops for 2X magnification. This is due to the Inverse Square Law.

What Alex was trying to say is a 20X zoom is not the magnification, but the zoom range. A tele-convertor. would not change the zoom range because it magnifies throughout the entire range. A 2X doubles the magnification of the lens.

Hello Val.

About your question the answer is yes. But I'm using the Century Optics x2.0 conveter with a Matte box for polarized filters.

Hello Val Rod,

In answer to your question: I use no filters - I take the UV filter which I normally have in place (for protection as much as anything) off when I use the 1.7X converter.

I suspect that the presence of a filter would increase the vignetting, though I haven't investigated this.

I've noticed no image degradation. I did use a filter with the glass removed between the camera and the teleconverter for a while (to prevent corss-threading). I thought it might be throwing things off (increased vignetting, etc.) so I took it off. For various reasons I needed to get a GL2 so I just leave the lens on it and use the old GL1 for closer objects (thought I may still switch which camera I use for what).

For the front-heaviness on the tripod I'm just going to add a weight to the handle.

One other note. The lens cap on my teleconverter always pops off so I needed another solution. For the last year I've used Saran Quick Covers. Think of a small shower cap.....

Some TuperWare lids fit very nicely as lens caps and they don't fall off.

Imperceptable image degradtion (I can't see any)...opens up a whole new world of possibilities...worth it in every way.

Sony 1.7X Tel

Thank you all,
for the very informative repplies. The Sony 1.7 teleconverter is in my priority shopping list. I live next to a wilderness area where there's plenty of coyotes, red shoulder and red-tailed hawks. So I can't wait to get it. I am thinking about adapting or designing a lens brace to support the teleconverter. Any ideas?