XLH1 manual lens discussion

Chris Hurd · July 16th, 2006, 02:58 PM

Quote:

I was hoping Pete or someone could put one of those on the H1 and see if the HD incompatible message appears if the camera is in SD mode.

Got one right here, and the answer is no, the HD incompatible message does not appear when the camera is in SD mode using the 3x or any other standard definition XL lens. Hope this helps,

Greg Boston · July 16th, 2006, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Got one right here, and the answer is no, the HD incompatible message does not appear when the camera is in SD mode using the 3x or any other standard definition XL lens. Hope this helps,

Well that answers my question. So we can say that in response to Meryem's original post that Canon is marketing these lenses as usable on the H1 when it's in SD mode. Wouldn't you agree, Chris?

-gb-

Chris Hurd · July 16th, 2006, 04:06 PM

Absolutely right Greg. Plus, despite the brief "HD incompatible lens" warning, many shooters are finding these standard definition lenses to be adequate for HD (and plenty of other threads around here already discuss this point already). As usual, since it's strictly a personal preference, "your mileage may vary" certainly applies here. Some folks may find the SD lenses to be adequate for HD... others may not.

Rob Mitchell · July 17th, 2006, 04:35 PM

You might be interested in 2 articles about Taylor Wigton and Rodney Charters (DPs for Fox's 24) and their tests with among others, the Canon H1. Even the big guys are looking into the future of these cameras for TV production. The H1 fared well, but none of the lenses measured up for Drama production. They did point out they were fine for documentaries but due to the huge depth of field and spongyness of the lens, or as they say "..it breathes when you try to focus." meaning you can't ever do a proper rack focus, these lenses are useless for drama. They didn't mention sharpness, and I guess that is because the above put them immediately out of the game.

Here are the links and it is really interesting reading.

Part 1
http://www.showreel.org/memberarea/article.php?141

Part 2

http://www.showreel.org/memberarea/article.php?172

Rodney Compton · July 18th, 2006, 02:50 PM

Hi Chris

Yes of course I knew about the hand grip situation - I never shoot wide angle and would have been quite willing to give up some functioning to get a lens that worked perfectly with the camera. As you say Canon Broadcast need to get together with their counterparts producing the XLH1 and make a range of compatible lenses.

You are saying that things can't happen overnight, but the price hike of £3000 did, and just what has been included in the new package to justify it.

Rod C

Robert Sanders · July 18th, 2006, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodney Compton

... but the price hike of £3000 did, and just what has been included in the new package to justify it.

Rod C

Uh, true HD CCDs, HD recording, HD-SDI output.

Rodney Compton · July 20th, 2006, 03:52 AM

Not enough - we want Canon to commit - like the slogan: Canon can...

Rod C

Pete Bauer · July 20th, 2006, 05:49 AM

Rodney, it sounds like the XL H1 isn't the camera for you. Perhaps your expectations are more in the $30K+ range? Many of us quite like what we get for less than $9000 in a camera system using a 1/3" HD CCD, interchangeable lenses (including 16x manual results quite acceptable to most who've actually tried it), nearly infinite image control, HD-SDI out, etc, etc.

If Canon do eventually decide to release an HD true manual lens for the XL series, lots of people will be happy to buy it. But in the meantime, it is a personal judgment about whether the XL H1 is worth its price, and many of us who are getting great results with it couldn't disagree with you more. It's personal opinion based on personal needs and wants vs what else is available at the price point. So I find it rather pointless to gripe about whether the camera is worth its cost, especially in a thread about manual lenses.

On the other hand, if there are further constructive suggestions about what folks would like to see in future XL-mount lenses, let's hear 'em. I'm sure all the manufacturers, including Canon, do keep their ear to the ground.

Steve Rosen · July 20th, 2006, 07:43 AM

For all those that might be interested, and I don't really know why anyone would be, I have placed an order for another 16x lens from ZGC this morning...

As you may recall, I had one but sold it with my XL2... I have grown used to some of the "oddities" of the 20x, and will still use it occasionally, but for the majority of my documentary work, I will use the 16x.

By the way, I build "data rings" for this type lens. In the early days of working with the Angenieux 12-120 they had these nice rings that clamped on the lens so you could see your footage (and aperature in that case) without taking your eye away from the viewfinder.. Too bad no one makes them now because they're almost essential with HDV - I make them out of plastic I buy from a hobby store and have an artist friend paint the scale for me... Steve Rosen

Dan Keaton · July 20th, 2006, 08:55 AM

Dear Steve,

I would like to see a photo of your "Data Rings". This sounds like a good idea.

Steve Rosen · July 20th, 2006, 09:28 AM

I'll send you a pic after I receive the lens and make a new ring (about 2 weeks)... I don't have a place to post it though...

Dan Keaton · July 20th, 2006, 10:54 AM

Dear Steve,

Thank you.

You may email me the photo privately, if you wish.

It may be possible to post it on this site.

Ken Diewert · July 21st, 2006, 11:51 AM

Steve,

If you can share it, I'm sure we'd all like to see it.

Steve Rosen · July 21st, 2006, 03:26 PM

When I get it done in a couple of weeks I'll email a pic to one of you and you can post it..

It's pretty simple, really..

cut a clean circle in a piece of the white plastic that you can buy at hobie (hobby, sorry, I used to race Hobie Cats)stores, thicker the better... it needs to be about 1/2 inch more in radius than the lens - i.e. an inch bigger in diameter (in the past I have used a compass with a sharp pointer on both ends so the point scribes the plastic, then you break it)...

then cut a clean hole in the center of your circle the exact diameter of the rotating lens barrel at the place you want to mount it.

cut this donut you have made in one place so you can put it on the lens and make sure it's a snug fit.

Make a mark where you can see it from the viewfinder on the back of your matte box or lens hood. I have cut a triangle from white gaffers tape or from the same plastic.. this is the pointer..

with your eye at the viewfinder mark dots with a pencil on the donut at the places you want to mark footage - either use the lens scale, or be really precise and measure distances and manually focus the lens.

remove the donut and apply the footage numbers.. you can use the rub-on numbers available at electronics stores, you can just write them on with a Pentel marker (although that fades quickly), or you can paint them on if you're good at that sort of thing..

The biggest problem is devising how to fix the donut permantly on the lens. In the past I've just used a narrow wrap (1/4") of black camera tape in front and in back of the donut, going round the lens enough times so it's thick enough to hold it solid.. this tape will stick to itself nicely but won't gum up the lens surface (not too much anyway).

clamping is the best, though, and with this one, if I have time, I may make the donut out of aluminum and design it so I can tighten it with a screwdriver.. more labor intensive, but I have a friend who teaches metal shop and I may call in a favor...

July 16th, 2006, 04:06 PM	#18
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Absolutely right Greg. Plus, despite the brief "HD incompatible lens" warning, many shooters are finding these standard definition lenses to be adequate for HD (and plenty of other threads around here already discuss this point already). As usual, since it's strictly a personal preference, "your mileage may vary" certainly applies here. Some folks may find the SD lenses to be adequate for HD... others may not. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

July 18th, 2006, 02:50 PM	#20
Rodney Compton Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: London Posts: 90	Handgrips Hi Chris Yes of course I knew about the hand grip situation - I never shoot wide angle and would have been quite willing to give up some functioning to get a lens that worked perfectly with the camera. As you say Canon Broadcast need to get together with their counterparts producing the XLH1 and make a range of compatible lenses. You are saying that things can't happen overnight, but the price hike of £3000 did, and just what has been included in the new package to justify it. Rod C

July 20th, 2006, 03:52 AM	#22
Rodney Compton Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: London Posts: 90	Goodies Not enough - we want Canon to commit - like the slogan: Canon can... Rod C

July 20th, 2006, 05:49 AM	#23
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	Rodney, it sounds like the XL H1 isn't the camera for you. Perhaps your expectations are more in the $30K+ range? Many of us quite like what we get for less than $9000 in a camera system using a 1/3" HD CCD, interchangeable lenses (including 16x manual results quite acceptable to most who've actually tried it), nearly infinite image control, HD-SDI out, etc, etc. If Canon do eventually decide to release an HD true manual lens for the XL series, lots of people will be happy to buy it. But in the meantime, it is a personal judgment about whether the XL H1 is worth its price, and many of us who are getting great results with it couldn't disagree with you more. It's personal opinion based on personal needs and wants vs what else is available at the price point. So I find it rather pointless to gripe about whether the camera is worth its cost, especially in a thread about manual lenses. On the other hand, if there are further constructive suggestions about what folks would like to see in future XL-mount lenses, let's hear 'em. I'm sure all the manufacturers, including Canon, do keep their ear to the ground. __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

July 20th, 2006, 08:55 AM	#25
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Steve, I would like to see a photo of your "Data Rings". This sounds like a good idea. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

July 17th, 2006, 04:35 PM	#19
Rob Mitchell Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Miami Beach, FL Posts: 38	You might be interested in 2 articles about Taylor Wigton and Rodney Charters (DPs for Fox's 24) and their tests with among others, the Canon H1. Even the big guys are looking into the future of these cameras for TV production. The H1 fared well, but none of the lenses measured up for Drama production. They did point out they were fine for documentaries but due to the huge depth of field and spongyness of the lens, or as they say "..it breathes when you try to focus." meaning you can't ever do a proper rack focus, these lenses are useless for drama. They didn't mention sharpness, and I guess that is because the above put them immediately out of the game. Here are the links and it is really interesting reading. Part 1 http://www.showreel.org/memberarea/article.php?141 Part 2 http://www.showreel.org/memberarea/article.php?172

July 20th, 2006, 07:43 AM	#24
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	For all those that might be interested, and I don't really know why anyone would be, I have placed an order for another 16x lens from ZGC this morning... As you may recall, I had one but sold it with my XL2... I have grown used to some of the "oddities" of the 20x, and will still use it occasionally, but for the majority of my documentary work, I will use the 16x. By the way, I build "data rings" for this type lens. In the early days of working with the Angenieux 12-120 they had these nice rings that clamped on the lens so you could see your footage (and aperature in that case) without taking your eye away from the viewfinder.. Too bad no one makes them now because they're almost essential with HDV - I make them out of plastic I buy from a hobby store and have an artist friend paint the scale for me... Steve Rosen

July 20th, 2006, 09:28 AM	#26
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	I'll send you a pic after I receive the lens and make a new ring (about 2 weeks)... I don't have a place to post it though...

July 20th, 2006, 10:54 AM	#27
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Steve, Thank you. You may email me the photo privately, if you wish. It may be possible to post it on this site. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

July 21st, 2006, 11:51 AM	#28
Ken Diewert Trustee Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Vancouver Island, Canada Posts: 1,200	Steve, If you can share it, I'm sure we'd all like to see it. __________________ C100, 5DMk2, FCPX

July 21st, 2006, 03:26 PM	#29
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	When I get it done in a couple of weeks I'll email a pic to one of you and you can post it.. It's pretty simple, really.. cut a clean circle in a piece of the white plastic that you can buy at hobie (hobby, sorry, I used to race Hobie Cats)stores, thicker the better... it needs to be about 1/2 inch more in radius than the lens - i.e. an inch bigger in diameter (in the past I have used a compass with a sharp pointer on both ends so the point scribes the plastic, then you break it)... then cut a clean hole in the center of your circle the exact diameter of the rotating lens barrel at the place you want to mount it. cut this donut you have made in one place so you can put it on the lens and make sure it's a snug fit. Make a mark where you can see it from the viewfinder on the back of your matte box or lens hood. I have cut a triangle from white gaffers tape or from the same plastic.. this is the pointer.. with your eye at the viewfinder mark dots with a pencil on the donut at the places you want to mark footage - either use the lens scale, or be really precise and measure distances and manually focus the lens. remove the donut and apply the footage numbers.. you can use the rub-on numbers available at electronics stores, you can just write them on with a Pentel marker (although that fades quickly), or you can paint them on if you're good at that sort of thing.. The biggest problem is devising how to fix the donut permantly on the lens. In the past I've just used a narrow wrap (1/4") of black camera tape in front and in back of the donut, going round the lens enough times so it's thick enough to hold it solid.. this tape will stick to itself nicely but won't gum up the lens surface (not too much anyway). clamping is the best, though, and with this one, if I have time, I may make the donut out of aluminum and design it so I can tighten it with a screwdriver.. more labor intensive, but I have a friend who teaches metal shop and I may call in a favor... Last edited by Steve Rosen; July 21st, 2006 at 06:01 PM.