EF Adapter with XL H1

[Meryem Ersoz]

nick, do you have any plans to try the EF adapter with an EF lens on shannon's camera, in the event you two do further testing together? what i'm really curious about would be a resolution test of XL2 with 35mm lens v. H1 with 35mm lens. in other words, is the resolution increase worth the $$ to upgrade, comparatively speaking? in outdoors testing of FX-1 v. XL2 with 35mm lenses, the quality of images seem very close, but given the distinct differences in having to position the camera to the image (12x zoom v. magnified 35mm lens), it makes it a tough choice. a resolution chart of XL2 with 35mm lenses v. H1 with the same 35mm mount would be very interesting to me.

*rant mode on*

dear canon:

i have purchased:
24-70mm EF lens $1000
70-200mm EF lens $1100
3x lens $850
XL2 $3700
EF adapter $400
GL2 $2500
Rebel XT $800
ZR-100 $300

plus assorted batteries, zoom controllers, etc. etc.

no wonder your stock price (ticker symbol CAJ, for those who follow such things) is skyrocketing....

throw me a frickin' bone, wouldja, fer cryin' out loud....

BODY ONLY BODY ONLY BODY ONLY!!

*rant mode off*

thanks for listening.....

[Lauri Kettunen]

Originally Posted by Meryem Ersoz

nick, do you have any plans to try the EF adapter with an EF lens on shannon's camera, in the event you two do further testing together?

Meryem, this is precisely what I'm planning to do in a few days. I may get the XL H1 before Christmas, or at least, immediately after. The first thing I'm planning is to check the drawing of the EF-adapter and Canon lenses with the resolution chart. Furthermore, I'll also compare the results to those from XL2, for I need to know this for backcompatibility.

[Meryem Ersoz]

oh, fabulous. if you could start a new thread with those results (i don't mean to hijack shannon and nick's thread here), i would be so grateful. a resolution chart would be very helpful, but if you could for example, shoot the same bird twice, same lens, different camera, i would love to see that sort of "real world" footage. also, since a lot of the most beautiful outdoors footage is shot early morning or during dusk "magic hour," perhaps you could offer some assessment regarding differences in various outdoor lighting environments?

i was out walking around yesterday with my dog and saw the most lovely red fox, a really fine animal, not that far from me, and all i had with me was 12x zoom. grrrr. useless. of course, the H1 is not exactly a walk-around camera, like the fx-1.....

maybe you could post your findings in a thread in chris' new wildlife forum because i think shannon and nick are doing more studio testing, and i think the needs for those of us who shoot a lot of outdoors are sometimes a bit different in terms of our lighting needs and expectations...

[Ron Armstrong]

Lauri;
Iam of the opinion that the EFadapter will degrade the image of the EF lenses on your XL H1.

[Ron Armstrong]

Hi Lauri;
To finish what I started! You, Nick or Shannon may be able to try the EF lenses without the adapter to determine the suitability of the EF lenses for HD. Simply position the lens ahead of the camera without the adapter and move the lens or adjust the zoom to gain focus. The aperture settings are more dificult.The settings will have to be made with the lens and adapter mounted to the camera and then remove the adapter and adjust the lens to gain focus. Throw a rag over the opening between the camera and lens to help keep out stray light. Awkward at best, but it does work. It's considerably easier with a RONSRAIL to support things. I have thought that the EF lenses are adequate for HD but have had no way to confirm it. Hopefully one of you can.
Great people on a great forum!!! Keep it up.

[Lauri Kettunen]

Originally Posted by Ron Armstrong

Iam of the opinion that the EFadapter will degrade the image of the EF lenses on your XL H1.

We may speculate on this, but after testing then we know and avoid speculation.

Canon were rather stupid, if the EF lenses did not function well with the XL H1. For, nowadays, wildlife photographers are one of the biggest, if not even the main marketing segment for long EF lenses. Correspondingly, the very same people must be a significant customer group also for the XL series camcorders. In wildlife business the weight of the equipment is a major factor, and many choose rather portability instead of the utmost quality of 1/2 inch CCD blocks. So, is it possible Canon did not make a marketing study before setting the specifications of the H1? We should know soon.

The idea of testing the camcorder without the EF-adapter is interesting. I'll try to do that.

[Meryem Ersoz]

hi ron: when you say that you believe the EF adapter will degrade the image, are you thinking that they will need to release a different adapter for the H1? because you're saying that you think EF lenses will work with the camera but not necessarily work well with the adapter? i can't imagine that canon would release an HDV camera with an XL2-like form factor and an interchangeable lens mount and not allow existing EF users to use our very!! expensive!! 35mm lenses. would they? that'd be a real heartbreak.

i guess we will find out. i'm very much looking forward to the outcomes of lauri's tests.

[Ron Armstrong]

I think it states in the Canon literature that they do not recommend the adapter or the 1.6 extender for HD work. Hopefully they will provide "L" type equipment for the HD system, as they do for the EOS. Time will tell. Your trials will be much appreciated.

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

"...I am of the opinion that the EFadapter will degrade the image of the EF lenses on your XL H1..."

I'm hoping that the Nikon Nikkor adapter (that has no extra glass) will be OK, and hopefully, like it does with the XL1.s/2, the 'lens warning' goes off after a few seconds.

[Ron Armstrong]

There has been considerable comment about the 35mm still lenses not being able to provide enough resolution to support HD. It is my hope that some of the early users can provide us with the answer to this. It would certainly alleviate some fears for the wildlife people. The Canon FD and the Nikon lenses do not require glass in the adapters, which would be an advantage. Canon would have no problem in replacing the 2 small lenses in the EF adapter with L glass to improve the quality. But, the question remains whether the premium lenses of Nikon and Canon will resolve enough for HD.
Will Canon answer the question? Hope so!!!

[Ronan Fournier]

I have discussed of that with someone of Canon, here in France. He told me that the lenses made for the XL1 and XL2 won't have enough resolution for the XL-H1, but the lenses made for the 35 mm still camera will be fine.
I hope he was right, but it seems logical to me : indeed the resolution of a Rebel XT Camera or the EOS 20D, with 8 Million pixels, is even much higher than the CCD of the XL-H1.

[Shannon Rawls]

Ron,

35mm Still SLR Film Camera Lenses will resolve plenty of resolution for the Canon XL-H1 in HD mode. So it's safe to use a lens adapter.
It's the SD "video" lenses like the 3x wide or the 16x manual that aren't up to snuff.
Read about it here: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...ens#post380070

Ronan,

About those D-SLR lenses...I don't know about that. The Digital Rebel, 1D, etc... type lenses may not be able to handle HD video. Those lenses are MAY NOT be as good as a "Real Film" SLR lens for a 1/3" size HD sensor with 1.67 million pixels in it.

- ShannonRawls.com

[Chris Hurd]

Actually the EF-S (that is, Canon D-SLR) lenses are just as good as the EF (that is, Canon 35mm SLR) lenses. The primary difference and the one single reason why you can't use a Canon D-SLR lens on the EF adapter for the XL series is pretty simple:

There's a lug on the EF-S lens mount that wasn't on the EF lens mount.
The EF adapter doesn't mate up with an EF-S lens because of that lug.

That's the only reason why you can't use an EF-S lens from a D-SLR. It has nothing to do with optical quality. Hope this helps,

[Ron Armstrong]

Ronan
Your conversation with the Canon rep is encouraging. The problem is the difference in the CCD size between the EOS and the XL. The XL being smaller has something to do with the comparison.Too technical for me!
I have just tried to reach my contacts at Canon; But they are out for the hollidays. However, I have just been offered an XL H1 demo for a few days, after the New Year. If that happens I will be able to run tests myself. At least some non technical tests.

[Shannon Rawls]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Actually the EF-S (that is, Canon D-SLR) lenses are just as good as the EF (that is, Canon 35mm SLR) lenses.

Chris,

Graeme said it couldn't. And that's why I said that. See:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...SLR#post374915

Notwithstanding the use of a Mini35.....according to him if you use a straight adapter (like the EF adapter we are discussing), then a D-SLR lens is not good enough for 1/3" chip HD recording. Is he off?

- Shannon