Which telephoto lens is the best at DVinfo.net

Jared Teter · February 20th, 2004, 12:54 PM

This may have been answered already somewhere else, but I was wondering which telephoto lens some of you would recommend for the GL2, the Sony 1.7x or the Century Optics 2.0x. Besides the magnification is one of them overall a higher quality than the other? I plan on filming wildlife with them. Thanks for all of your help in advance.

Colin Rayner · February 20th, 2004, 04:05 PM

I went with the Century Optics 2 X, using it for exactly the same as you wildlife. Everyone says that the glass is the best, and for the price it would have to be. Sems to me most everyone videoing wildlife/hunting that I have talked to use and are happy with the Century optics converter. I got it from Zotz digital and have had good service from Tom.
Be aware that there is some viginetting until you reach about mid zoom tho'.

Brent Jensen · February 20th, 2004, 05:35 PM

When I got my GL2, the store sold me a Sakar 2X teleconvertor. With this, I couldn't get focus when zoomed in all the way, even manually. So I returned it, and they recommended the Kenko Pro 2X, which was definitely much more substantial than the Sakar and cost $200. With this I got some blue outlining and a fuzzy picture that was not high enough quality for me, so I returned that one and gave up on it.

Does the Century really do the job and worth the price?
How well do you have to secure the camera to get a sharp picture -- monopod, light tripod, heavy tripod, fence post? How much light to you need -- direct sunlight, shadows, overcast?

Thanks

February 21st, 2004, 05:42 PM

i posted the same question a little while back, you can find it via a search..
the consensus seemed to be that both the sony and century did a good job (the century slightly better) but for the money, the sony is worth it

Andrew Hogan · February 21st, 2004, 06:38 PM

Brent, as for your second question Camera stability, the acceptable standard to get a sharp image is really subjectional. With 35mm photography the handheld formula is use focal length (at least) to determine shutter speed. ie if you are using a 250mm focal lenght lens then handheld shooting should not be under 1/250 second. With video it is different. It also depends on what you are shooting and the effect you want, as the eye can track some things moving around the TV screen if its not too eratic and doesn't go out of the frame. At 40x zoom I think a good heavy tripod is the way to go, then expose normally. I think Pans with a Monopod would be difficult at this magnification.

just my thoughts

Jan Jacobson · February 21st, 2004, 06:49 PM

The biggest problem will be with shots that need to be followed. A good fluid head will be essential if you want the smooooth pans we see on the tube.

They are the result of, say - $800 invested in just the fluid head. And that's a minimum.

Having said that, I use a Bogen 3040 with a rather early "fluid" head by Bogen. It was a gift from one of Marty Stouffer's (sp) Wild America cinematographers, Steve Kreschel. He started with it, and I dragged it through the 'Glades for at least a decade.

The instant set feature of the 3040 legs is a good substitute for a bowl on the pan head, and allows very fast tripod setups - just watch the bubble level carefully.

When I used the elevator function, as long as I remembered to lock it firmly, it added little slop.

I found that doubling the handle length helped, as did anticipating the direction the critter was going to move so that I could take up the slop in the tripod (very little) and the head (rather more!).

A longer handle means better leverage, more handle movement for each degree of camera movement, and thus better control.

So far, I have managed to get away without having to spend a kilobuck or so. But I can see it coming. Sigh!

May 18th, 2004, 01:49 PM

sorry to start this thread up again - i was just looking at some old threads about tele lenses and jan's post interested me....

Jan,
When you said doubling the handle size gave you better leverage and therefore a more stable shot, what did you buy to increase the size of your handle? (i have the 501 bogen head) - And also, in keeping with this belief that a longer handle equals a better shot, it would be right to think that the farther back i keep my hand on my current handle, the better my shot will be, correct?

Marco Leavitt · May 20th, 2004, 09:50 PM

Canon makes a telephoto adapter that's been recommended in here previously -- TC-DC58N 1.75x. I've never used it, but you should turn up some comments by doing a search.

http://tinyurl.com/3dkfg

Supposedly it vignettes until about halfway through the zoom.

Jan Jacobson · May 21st, 2004, 12:25 PM

I simply took the handle to an aluminum supplier and got two short lengths of tube and rod, with which I made an extension.

I use the full length of the handle, but have noticed that when using a 1.5X lens on my GL-2, that I have to be careful of handle movement due to fatigue. Any slight tremors are likely to be slightly visible unless I am careful.

I have also noticed that there is sometimes what seems to be an unavoidable, but barely noticeable jump when starting a pan, or when reversing a pan while following a subject.

Try to tighten the center bolt (located under the vertical "fluid" disks), if your head seems to have too mush play in it.

Lastly, carry your tripod in a case to prevent side loads on the head. Once they loosen up, they are not easy to tighten up again.

February 20th, 2004, 12:54 PM	#1
Jared Teter Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Salt Lake City Posts: 105	Which telephoto lens is the best This may have been answered already somewhere else, but I was wondering which telephoto lens some of you would recommend for the GL2, the Sony 1.7x or the Century Optics 2.0x. Besides the magnification is one of them overall a higher quality than the other? I plan on filming wildlife with them. Thanks for all of your help in advance.

May 21st, 2004, 12:25 PM	#9
Jan Jacobson New Boot Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Everglades Institute (50 miles west of Miami Posts: 5	fluid head handle extension & usage thereof. I simply took the handle to an aluminum supplier and got two short lengths of tube and rod, with which I made an extension. I use the full length of the handle, but have noticed that when using a 1.5X lens on my GL-2, that I have to be careful of handle movement due to fatigue. Any slight tremors are likely to be slightly visible unless I am careful. I have also noticed that there is sometimes what seems to be an unavoidable, but barely noticeable jump when starting a pan, or when reversing a pan while following a subject. Try to tighten the center bolt (located under the vertical "fluid" disks), if your head seems to have too mush play in it. Lastly, carry your tripod in a case to prevent side loads on the head. Once they loosen up, they are not easy to tighten up again.

February 20th, 2004, 04:05 PM	#2
Colin Rayner Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Geraldine, NEW ZEALAND Posts: 88	I went with the Century Optics 2 X, using it for exactly the same as you wildlife. Everyone says that the glass is the best, and for the price it would have to be. Sems to me most everyone videoing wildlife/hunting that I have talked to use and are happy with the Century optics converter. I got it from Zotz digital and have had good service from Tom. Be aware that there is some viginetting until you reach about mid zoom tho'.

February 20th, 2004, 05:35 PM	#3
Brent Jensen Tourist Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Posts: 2	When I got my GL2, the store sold me a Sakar 2X teleconvertor. With this, I couldn't get focus when zoomed in all the way, even manually. So I returned it, and they recommended the Kenko Pro 2X, which was definitely much more substantial than the Sakar and cost $200. With this I got some blue outlining and a fuzzy picture that was not high enough quality for me, so I returned that one and gave up on it. Does the Century really do the job and worth the price? How well do you have to secure the camera to get a sharp picture -- monopod, light tripod, heavy tripod, fence post? How much light to you need -- direct sunlight, shadows, overcast? Thanks

February 21st, 2004, 05:42 PM	#4
Guest Posts: n/a	i posted the same question a little while back, you can find it via a search.. the consensus seemed to be that both the sony and century did a good job (the century slightly better) but for the money, the sony is worth it

February 21st, 2004, 06:38 PM	#5
Andrew Hogan Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Canberra AUSTRALIA Posts: 169	Brent, as for your second question Camera stability, the acceptable standard to get a sharp image is really subjectional. With 35mm photography the handheld formula is use focal length (at least) to determine shutter speed. ie if you are using a 250mm focal lenght lens then handheld shooting should not be under 1/250 second. With video it is different. It also depends on what you are shooting and the effect you want, as the eye can track some things moving around the TV screen if its not too eratic and doesn't go out of the frame. At 40x zoom I think a good heavy tripod is the way to go, then expose normally. I think Pans with a Monopod would be difficult at this magnification. just my thoughts

February 21st, 2004, 06:49 PM	#6
Jan Jacobson New Boot Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Everglades Institute (50 miles west of Miami Posts: 5	The biggest problem will be with shots that need to be followed. A good fluid head will be essential if you want the smooooth pans we see on the tube. They are the result of, say - $800 invested in just the fluid head. And that's a minimum. Having said that, I use a Bogen 3040 with a rather early "fluid" head by Bogen. It was a gift from one of Marty Stouffer's (sp) Wild America cinematographers, Steve Kreschel. He started with it, and I dragged it through the 'Glades for at least a decade. The instant set feature of the 3040 legs is a good substitute for a bowl on the pan head, and allows very fast tripod setups - just watch the bubble level carefully. When I used the elevator function, as long as I remembered to lock it firmly, it added little slop. I found that doubling the handle length helped, as did anticipating the direction the critter was going to move so that I could take up the slop in the tripod (very little) and the head (rather more!). A longer handle means better leverage, more handle movement for each degree of camera movement, and thus better control. So far, I have managed to get away without having to spend a kilobuck or so. But I can see it coming. Sigh!

May 18th, 2004, 01:49 PM	#7
Guest Posts: n/a	sorry to start this thread up again - i was just looking at some old threads about tele lenses and jan's post interested me.... Jan, When you said doubling the handle size gave you better leverage and therefore a more stable shot, what did you buy to increase the size of your handle? (i have the 501 bogen head) - And also, in keeping with this belief that a longer handle equals a better shot, it would be right to think that the farther back i keep my hand on my current handle, the better my shot will be, correct?

May 20th, 2004, 09:50 PM	#8
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Canon makes a telephoto adapter that's been recommended in here previously -- TC-DC58N 1.75x. I've never used it, but you should turn up some comments by doing a search. http://tinyurl.com/3dkfg Supposedly it vignettes until about halfway through the zoom.