Manual vs Auto lens at DVinfo.net

Don Palomaki · July 29th, 2003, 04:18 AM

Any one have a pointer to a site with some good image captures that illustrate the difference in image sharpness between the XL1s standard (automatic) and manual lenses?

Jeff Donald · August 1st, 2003, 09:24 PM

American Cinematographer did resolution tests when they reviewed the XL1s and the Mini 35. That was at least a year ago. They printed resolution charts in the mag. and the manual lens was clearly superior. While, I don't shoot resolution charts for a living, they can provide a benchmark for evaluating some performance criteria. I've always found my 14X much sharper than the 16x (white) lens. I never shoot the same subject side by side, but similar shoots always looked better with the 14X. The only thing I really like about the 16X is the IS.

Dean Sensui · August 2nd, 2003, 06:07 AM

I'm planning to get the 16x manual lens. Aside from reported acuity advantages, there's also the issue of focusing during a zoom -- something that I run into occasionally when doing a "run-and-gun" job.

The standard Canon lens can only zoom -or- focus. But not both at the same time. It's not an issue for a manual lens that can do both simultaneously.

Also, there's apparently less of an issue regarding back focus with the manual lens. It's a major issue with the stock IS lens.

Dean Sensui
Base Two Productions

Don Palomaki · August 5th, 2003, 04:30 AM

Is the American Cinematographer article available on line?

Jeff Donald · August 5th, 2003, 05:54 AM

The ASC magazine is available here. But the issue I'm referring to is not listed in their archives.

July 29th, 2003, 04:18 AM	#1
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	Manual vs Auto lens Any one have a pointer to a site with some good image captures that illustrate the difference in image sharpness between the XL1s standard (automatic) and manual lenses? __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

August 1st, 2003, 09:24 PM	#2
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	American Cinematographer did resolution tests when they reviewed the XL1s and the Mini 35. That was at least a year ago. They printed resolution charts in the mag. and the manual lens was clearly superior. While, I don't shoot resolution charts for a living, they can provide a benchmark for evaluating some performance criteria. I've always found my 14X much sharper than the 16x (white) lens. I never shoot the same subject side by side, but similar shoots always looked better with the 14X. The only thing I really like about the 16X is the IS. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

August 5th, 2003, 04:30 AM	#4
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	Is the American Cinematographer article available on line? __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

August 5th, 2003, 05:54 AM	#5
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	The ASC magazine is available here. But the issue I'm referring to is not listed in their archives. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

August 2nd, 2003, 06:07 AM	#3
Dean Sensui Inner Circle Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 2,054	I'm planning to get the 16x manual lens. Aside from reported acuity advantages, there's also the issue of focusing during a zoom -- something that I run into occasionally when doing a "run-and-gun" job. The standard Canon lens can only zoom -or- focus. But not both at the same time. It's not an issue for a manual lens that can do both simultaneously. Also, there's apparently less of an issue regarding back focus with the manual lens. It's a major issue with the stock IS lens. Dean Sensui Base Two Productions