1.6 extender does not make much of a difference at DVinfo.net

Greg Jacobson · April 13th, 2005, 11:07 PM

I put on the Century 1.6 extender on the XL2 today and it could hardly tell the difference. Does not seem to be worth the cost.

But I should have expected this because a few weeks ago I tried 2 of the little Panasonic cameras, one had 20x zoom and the other had a 30x zoom and the difference was very small.

I guess the only way to get a nice telephoto is to use the SLR lenses.

Chris Hurd · April 14th, 2005, 06:28 AM

Greg, you've seen my XL2 Fields of View Comparison, right? There are some 1.6x Extender examples in there. Seems like a substantial difference to me, but it all depends on how powerful you want your telescope to be, I guess!

Tom Hardwick · April 15th, 2005, 07:14 AM

I tend to agree Greg. If you've got a camcorder with a 2x digital zoom (and most are 6x or so) you can simulate what a 1.6x telephoto converter will look like by zooming into the digital zoom area just past half way. As you say, it's not a big difference and many people are disappointed.

On the other hand if you have a 0.6x wide-angle converter this makes a huge difference to the angle of view.

tom.

Phil French · April 15th, 2005, 12:42 PM

I have the Canon 1.6X extender on my XL1s. I use it with my stock 16 x lense and I find it makes a big difference when shooting wildlife stuff. It makes the difference when I want to fill the screen with a bird or some other small animal. For me, it often makes the difference between usable and unusable footage. I would like to try it with an XL2 and the 20 x lense. You can never get too close...

Michel Brewer · April 17th, 2005, 04:04 AM

I got the opportunity to see the difference a few months ago at a symposium for UCLA, They were supposed to send a betacam op, but sent a xl1s op instead, I wa shooting for a corp. client and comparing mine with the 1.6 to his, I was a decent amount tighter on my client than he could get....of course he was getting a better day rate so it was all a wash.

M

Per Johan Naesje · April 19th, 2005, 12:31 PM

Greg, I am shooting a lot of wilderness footage and I use the 1.6 x ext. quite often to get really close to the object.
I have put toghether two footage of the moon just to show you how big the difference really are!

Take a look at this url:
http://www.video-film.no/snutter/moon.wmv

- Per Johan

April 13th, 2005, 11:07 PM	#1
Greg Jacobson Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: New York Posts: 141	1.6 extender does not make much of a difference I put on the Century 1.6 extender on the XL2 today and it could hardly tell the difference. Does not seem to be worth the cost. But I should have expected this because a few weeks ago I tried 2 of the little Panasonic cameras, one had 20x zoom and the other had a 30x zoom and the difference was very small. I guess the only way to get a nice telephoto is to use the SLR lenses.

April 14th, 2005, 06:28 AM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,369 Images: 513	Greg, you've seen my XL2 Fields of View Comparison, right? There are some 1.6x Extender examples in there. Seems like a substantial difference to me, but it all depends on how powerful you want your telescope to be, I guess! __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

April 15th, 2005, 12:42 PM	#4
Phil French Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Lousana, Alberta, Canada Posts: 146	I have the Canon 1.6X extender on my XL1s. I use it with my stock 16 x lense and I find it makes a big difference when shooting wildlife stuff. It makes the difference when I want to fill the screen with a bird or some other small animal. For me, it often makes the difference between usable and unusable footage. I would like to try it with an XL2 and the 20 x lense. You can never get too close... __________________ Nature Boy

April 17th, 2005, 04:04 AM	#5
Michel Brewer Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Ventura California Posts: 179	1.6 ext I got the opportunity to see the difference a few months ago at a symposium for UCLA, They were supposed to send a betacam op, but sent a xl1s op instead, I wa shooting for a corp. client and comparing mine with the 1.6 to his, I was a decent amount tighter on my client than he could get....of course he was getting a better day rate so it was all a wash. M __________________ milking the celebrity criminal trials thank god for the freaks

April 15th, 2005, 07:14 AM	#3
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I tend to agree Greg. If you've got a camcorder with a 2x digital zoom (and most are 6x or so) you can simulate what a 1.6x telephoto converter will look like by zooming into the digital zoom area just past half way. As you say, it's not a big difference and many people are disappointed. On the other hand if you have a 0.6x wide-angle converter this makes a huge difference to the angle of view. tom.

April 19th, 2005, 12:31 PM	#6
Per Johan Naesje Trustee Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Akershus, Norway Posts: 1,413	Greg, I am shooting a lot of wilderness footage and I use the 1.6 x ext. quite often to get really close to the object. I have put toghether two footage of the moon just to show you how big the difference really are! Take a look at this url: http://www.video-film.no/snutter/moon.wmv - Per Johan