20x zoom lens -- various topics

Jim Giberti · September 16th, 2004, 05:18 PM

Yes if you've got a reasonably steady hand you can get fine results.

Marty Hudzik · October 22nd, 2004, 09:26 PM

IF you move the neutral density filter slightly...not goining all the way to next marking it still seems to have an effect on the light coming in. For example....I have it off, I turn it about halfway to 1/6 yet I notice it stops down a little. Then I turn it more and it stops down again before it gets all the way to 1/6. The same behavior exists from 1/6-1/32. Why is this?

And would it hurt to film at one of these stop-gap settings? Is this even normal?

Thanks!

Greg Boston · October 22nd, 2004, 09:38 PM

I just checked mine. It does the same thing. The only bad thing I saw was that the VF doesn't display ND if you aren't at one of the two actual positions. But it was indeed variable like you said.

Hmmm. A bonus feature.

=gb=

Jeff Donald · October 22nd, 2004, 09:55 PM

It's not a defect or fault. Pro BQ cameras work the same way. I would not select the in-between positions. It wasn't designed to operate in that manner.

Drew Daywalt · October 28th, 2004, 10:08 AM

I just read that the XL2 20 x lens is not usible with the 72 mm Century Optics wide angle lens because the curvature of the glass is such that the outside glass on the 20 x zoom will touch the inside glass on the wide angle and scratch them.

BUT -- I just got the 72 mm Century Optics Fisheye lens (OVS-FEWA-3XL) from the guys at Samy's Camera in Venice CA, and now I'm worried that it might also scratch the glass on the lenses. Samy's didn't have an answer for me.

Does anyone here know?

Thanks a million for your time,
Drew

David Lach · October 28th, 2004, 11:45 AM

It's true, there's no wide angle adapter for the 20x lens yet, this was announced a while ago. But Century are apparently working on one.

Maybe you could try to use step rings. A 72mm to 77mm with a 77mm to 72mm. That would cost you around $20. Maybe there's even spacer rings that are already 72mm to 72mm. Check it out. Although I'm really not sure what kind of results it will produce when focusing. And it might also vignette. Might want to try it out in a store first.

Drew Daywalt · October 28th, 2004, 12:19 PM

Thanks David,

I used the fish eye adapter once and both lenses seem fine, but the potential of scratching them scares the crap out of me. At this point I'm thinking of returning the Century Fish eye and just upgrading to the canon 3x wide angle.

anyone have thoughts on that lens?

thanks for your time,
Drew

Jean-Philippe Archibald · October 28th, 2004, 12:33 PM

The 3X lens is certenly a great addtion to an XL2, but it is not a fish eyes lens. You will get a wider angle than the stock 20X, but not as wide as with the fish eyes adapter, and without the extreme distortion.

Jimmy McKenzie · October 28th, 2004, 12:51 PM

If you are using the xl2 for commercial purposes, then the 3x wide is a must for your collection of gear. Perfect for tight spots or close to objects where the background assumes a gradual perspective.

To this lens, (the 3x) there are aftermarket wide adapters you can add to achieve the "skateboardermegasfisheyevideo" look.

Greg Boston · October 28th, 2004, 01:57 PM

David,

The spacer ring idea won't work. The correct adapter for the 20x and 16x auto lenses has a bayonet mount just like the lense hood uses. It doesn't screw on the front. That is why I am selling you my .6 because it's a clamp on made for the 14x manual lense. I need the bayonet mount version.

regards,

=gb=

Marty Hudzik · October 28th, 2004, 02:24 PM

Check with ZGC and ask for Chris. I spoke with her the other day and they had 3 of the new xl2 compatible .7x wide angle Century Converters on the way. I spoke with Century myself last Friday and they told me they have been shipping for 2 weeks....now 3. Good Luck.

Oh...and they told me if I already had the existing .7x I could send it in to be modded to work with the Xl2 but it would cost $200 bucks!

Chris Hurd · October 28th, 2004, 03:09 PM

Instead of paying for the modification, you could always sell your existing .7x to an XL1 / XL1S owner and apply those funds to a new one.

Marty Hudzik · October 28th, 2004, 03:26 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Instead of paying for the modification, you could always sell your existing .7x to an XL1 / XL1S owner and apply those funds to a new one. -->>>

The problem with this is that I have seen, and almost bought the .7x Xl1 unit on Ebay for as little as $300.00-350.00. The price I got on the new unit was $749. That was discounted from the $799 list price. So if you have the old one you might be better to have it modded as the price between the used xl1 compatible and the new Xl2 compatible is almost $400.00. Even if you got a used one for $350 and paid $200 for the upgrade you are still coming in at $200 less than the new one is going for.

The original .7x is retailing on sale at ZGC for $619. The new on $749.

Hopefully the prices will drop. I'm sticking with the .6x when I need wide. The .7x looks too darn big to hang out there on the end of the 20x lens anyway as its too heavy already! The .6x isn't really too bad there. Just no zoom through.

David Lach · October 28th, 2004, 05:39 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Greg Boston : David,

The spacer ring idea won't work. The correct adapter for the 20x and 16x auto lenses has a bayonet mount just like the lense hood uses. It doesn't screw on the front. That is why I am selling you my .6 because it's a clamp on made for the 14x manual lense. I need the bayonet mount version.

regards,

=gb= -->>>

B&H sell a bayonet 6 to 72mm adapter for screw-in filters. Wouldn't this work with a 72mm threaded adapter and the 20x? Those rings are designed for filters mind you, so I'm not sure I'd risk putting the weight of a glass adapter on it.

Shane Carl · December 26th, 2004, 11:08 PM

After much deliberation, I have decided to purchase an XL-2. I've spent too much time trying to make a decision and am now ready to take the digital dive.

My problem is whether or not to go with the standard 20x lens or the manual 16x lens. I plan to use this EXCLUSIVELY for short/feature length films. I just don't know what would better suit my needs.

Also:
Would I need a 3x lens as well?
Is a b/w viewfinder absolutely necessary for focusing?

Thanks a bunch guys!
All of your help is greatly appreciated.

October 22nd, 2004, 09:26 PM	#32
Marty Hudzik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 1,771	ND ring odd behavior on 20x? IF you move the neutral density filter slightly...not goining all the way to next marking it still seems to have an effect on the light coming in. For example....I have it off, I turn it about halfway to 1/6 yet I notice it stops down a little. Then I turn it more and it stops down again before it gets all the way to 1/6. The same behavior exists from 1/6-1/32. Why is this? And would it hurt to film at one of these stop-gap settings? Is this even normal? Thanks!

October 22nd, 2004, 09:55 PM	#34
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	It's not a defect or fault. Pro BQ cameras work the same way. I would not select the in-between positions. It wasn't designed to operate in that manner. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

October 28th, 2004, 10:08 AM	#35
Drew Daywalt New Boot Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Los Angeles CA Posts: 6	XL2 20x lens not usable with Century optics lens? help! I just read that the XL2 20 x lens is not usible with the 72 mm Century Optics wide angle lens because the curvature of the glass is such that the outside glass on the 20 x zoom will touch the inside glass on the wide angle and scratch them. BUT -- I just got the 72 mm Century Optics Fisheye lens (OVS-FEWA-3XL) from the guys at Samy's Camera in Venice CA, and now I'm worried that it might also scratch the glass on the lenses. Samy's didn't have an answer for me. Does anyone here know? Thanks a million for your time, Drew

October 28th, 2004, 12:33 PM	#38
Jean-Philippe Archibald Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Saguenay, Québec, Canada Posts: 1,051	The 3X lens is certenly a great addtion to an XL2, but it is not a fish eyes lens. You will get a wider angle than the stock 20X, but not as wide as with the fish eyes adapter, and without the extreme distortion. __________________ Jean-Philippe Archibald http://www.jparchibald.com - http://www.vimeo.com/jparchib

October 28th, 2004, 03:09 PM	#42
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Instead of paying for the modification, you could always sell your existing .7x to an XL1 / XL1S owner and apply those funds to a new one. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

September 16th, 2004, 05:18 PM	#31
Jim Giberti Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Bethel, VT Posts: 824	Yes if you've got a reasonably steady hand you can get fine results.

October 22nd, 2004, 09:38 PM	#33
Greg Boston Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DFW area, TX Posts: 6,117 Images: 1	I just checked mine. It does the same thing. The only bad thing I saw was that the VF doesn't display ND if you aren't at one of the two actual positions. But it was indeed variable like you said. Hmmm. A bonus feature. =gb=

October 28th, 2004, 11:45 AM	#36
David Lach Major Player Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Montreal, QC, Canada Posts: 570	It's true, there's no wide angle adapter for the 20x lens yet, this was announced a while ago. But Century are apparently working on one. Maybe you could try to use step rings. A 72mm to 77mm with a 77mm to 72mm. That would cost you around $20. Maybe there's even spacer rings that are already 72mm to 72mm. Check it out. Although I'm really not sure what kind of results it will produce when focusing. And it might also vignette. Might want to try it out in a store first.

October 28th, 2004, 12:19 PM	#37
Drew Daywalt New Boot Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Los Angeles CA Posts: 6	Thanks David, I used the fish eye adapter once and both lenses seem fine, but the potential of scratching them scares the crap out of me. At this point I'm thinking of returning the Century Fish eye and just upgrading to the canon 3x wide angle. anyone have thoughts on that lens? thanks for your time, Drew

October 28th, 2004, 12:51 PM	#39
Jimmy McKenzie Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Waterloo Ontario Posts: 721	If you are using the xl2 for commercial purposes, then the 3x wide is a must for your collection of gear. Perfect for tight spots or close to objects where the background assumes a gradual perspective. To this lens, (the 3x) there are aftermarket wide adapters you can add to achieve the "skateboardermegasfisheyevideo" look.

October 28th, 2004, 01:57 PM	#40
Greg Boston Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DFW area, TX Posts: 6,117 Images: 1	David, The spacer ring idea won't work. The correct adapter for the 20x and 16x auto lenses has a bayonet mount just like the lense hood uses. It doesn't screw on the front. That is why I am selling you my .6 because it's a clamp on made for the 14x manual lense. I need the bayonet mount version. regards, =gb=

October 28th, 2004, 02:24 PM	#41
Marty Hudzik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 1,771	Check with ZGC and ask for Chris. I spoke with her the other day and they had 3 of the new xl2 compatible .7x wide angle Century Converters on the way. I spoke with Century myself last Friday and they told me they have been shipping for 2 weeks....now 3. Good Luck. Oh...and they told me if I already had the existing .7x I could send it in to be modded to work with the Xl2 but it would cost $200 bucks!

October 28th, 2004, 03:26 PM	#43
Marty Hudzik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 1,771	<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Instead of paying for the modification, you could always sell your existing .7x to an XL1 / XL1S owner and apply those funds to a new one. -->>> The problem with this is that I have seen, and almost bought the .7x Xl1 unit on Ebay for as little as $300.00-350.00. The price I got on the new unit was $749. That was discounted from the $799 list price. So if you have the old one you might be better to have it modded as the price between the used xl1 compatible and the new Xl2 compatible is almost $400.00. Even if you got a used one for $350 and paid $200 for the upgrade you are still coming in at $200 less than the new one is going for. The original .7x is retailing on sale at ZGC for $619. The new on $749. Hopefully the prices will drop. I'm sticking with the .6x when I need wide. The .7x looks too darn big to hang out there on the end of the 20x lens anyway as its too heavy already! The .6x isn't really too bad there. Just no zoom through.

October 28th, 2004, 05:39 PM	#44
David Lach Major Player Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Montreal, QC, Canada Posts: 570	<<<-- Originally posted by Greg Boston : David, The spacer ring idea won't work. The correct adapter for the 20x and 16x auto lenses has a bayonet mount just like the lense hood uses. It doesn't screw on the front. That is why I am selling you my .6 because it's a clamp on made for the 14x manual lense. I need the bayonet mount version. regards, =gb= -->>> B&H sell a bayonet 6 to 72mm adapter for screw-in filters. Wouldn't this work with a 72mm threaded adapter and the 20x? Those rings are designed for filters mind you, so I'm not sure I'd risk putting the weight of a glass adapter on it.

December 26th, 2004, 11:08 PM	#45
Shane Carl New Boot Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Washington Posts: 12	20x vs 16x After much deliberation, I have decided to purchase an XL-2. I've spent too much time trying to make a decision and am now ready to take the digital dive. My problem is whether or not to go with the standard 20x lens or the manual 16x lens. I plan to use this EXCLUSIVELY for short/feature length films. I just don't know what would better suit my needs. Also: Would I need a 3x lens as well? Is a b/w viewfinder absolutely necessary for focusing? Thanks a bunch guys! All of your help is greatly appreciated.