glide pro & telephoto2x at DVinfo.net

Gerald Goulder · May 21st, 2003, 09:23 PM

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.

Alex Knappenberger · May 21st, 2003, 09:43 PM

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...

Graham Bernard · May 21st, 2003, 10:52 PM

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

Val Rodriguez · May 21st, 2003, 11:11 PM

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.

Graham Bernard · May 21st, 2003, 11:33 PM

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

Val Rodriguez · May 21st, 2003, 11:49 PM

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?

Graham Bernard · May 21st, 2003, 11:59 PM

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

Joe Sacher · May 22nd, 2003, 08:49 AM

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.

Jeff Price · May 22nd, 2003, 09:41 AM

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.

Alex Knappenberger · May 22nd, 2003, 11:13 AM

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

Charles Papert · May 22nd, 2003, 08:18 PM

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.

Steve Nunez · May 23rd, 2003, 06:58 PM

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)

Val Rodriguez · May 23rd, 2003, 07:41 PM

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.

Jeff Price · May 23rd, 2003, 07:55 PM

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.

Steve Nunez · May 23rd, 2003, 07:55 PM

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.

May 21st, 2003, 09:23 PM	#1
Gerald Goulder New Boot Join Date: May 2003 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 10	glide pro & telephoto2x 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.

May 21st, 2003, 11:11 PM	#4
Val Rodriguez Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Mission Viejo, CA Posts: 35	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 Rod

May 21st, 2003, 11:33 PM	#5
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	Help! 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

May 21st, 2003, 11:49 PM	#6
Val Rodriguez Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Mission Viejo, CA Posts: 35	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? __________________ Val Rod

May 22nd, 2003, 09:41 AM	#9
Jeff Price Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Chico, California Posts: 357	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. __________________ Jeff Price Flickerflix Nature Videos flickerflix@yahoo.com

May 21st, 2003, 09:43 PM	#2
Alex Knappenberger High School Student Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canton, Ohio, USA Posts: 609	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...

May 21st, 2003, 10:52 PM	#3
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	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

May 21st, 2003, 11:59 PM	#7
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	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

May 22nd, 2003, 08:49 AM	#8
Joe Sacher Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 177	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.

May 22nd, 2003, 11:13 AM	#10
Alex Knappenberger High School Student Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canton, Ohio, USA Posts: 609	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

May 22nd, 2003, 08:18 PM	#11
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	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. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

May 23rd, 2003, 06:58 PM	#12
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	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 Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

May 23rd, 2003, 07:41 PM	#13
Val Rodriguez Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Mission Viejo, CA Posts: 35	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. __________________ Val Rod

May 23rd, 2003, 07:55 PM	#14
Jeff Price Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Chico, California Posts: 357	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. __________________ Jeff Price Flickerflix Nature Videos flickerflix@yahoo.com