EF Lens adapter / EF Lenses / EOS Lens

Rick Banfield · February 18th, 2002, 03:00 AM

Just when I thought I had the answer! There is always another factor!
Thank you, esp. Larry Olsen and I found your original inquiry and the replys from others. Today I was looking at the EF 70-200L f2.8 (fixed) IS USM Lens.
Any comment about using this with a doubler on the front if avail..Century? as opposed to the 100-400L zoom same price here in Australia.
How many f/stops do you lose with the EF adapter?
The deer I film in NZ and Australia are nearly nocturnal and light is constantly a problem.
I would not normally pan at long focal lengths, so would the stabilizer "do its job" for wind and "heartbeat pounding" whilst turned on, even with tripod mount?
Regards from Phillip Island
Australia
Rick Banfield

Adrian Douglas · February 18th, 2002, 06:47 AM

Hey Rick,

My aunt and uncle have a house there in Cowes, probably right next door to you.

You won't lose F stops with the EF Adapter, the only thing that changes is the focal length.

Rick Banfield · February 18th, 2002, 09:19 AM

Further to part of my last message...do you lose any light with EF adapter?
Rick Banfield

February 18th, 2002, 12:26 PM

Chris, the "hunting" this lens does is similar to what happens with the stock lens when OIS is turned on and the camera is mounted on a tripod, only much more pronounced. So I'm not sure if it is possible to use any lens with the IS turned on while mounted on a tripod. Anyway, I just leave the IS off. Plus it is much easier to focus this lens compared to the stock 16x.

Even with this problem I have had some excellent results with the lens and I needed as much telephoto as I could get without turning it into a telescope. The main thing that helped was using a much sturdier tripod. I switched from a Bogen 503 to a Libec H60 made by Mathews and some good sticks.

February 18th, 2002, 12:42 PM

Rick, there is no f stop loss with the EF adapter. The 100-400mm lens is 4.5 to 5.6 and that range is available when mounted on the Xl1.

There is still a certain amount of "hunting" even without panning. It also is more pronounced at the extreme telephoto. I just leave the IS off and learn how to breath right.

I don't have any experience with the Century doublers but the more glass you put in between the lens and the chip the more you will effect the overall quality of the pix. The quality of the picture from the 100-400mm is excellent.

Adam Lawrence · February 27th, 2002, 11:58 AM

I was considering the canon EF adapter..

Will i be able to use any SLR lense?

I have a 50-200mm zoom and a standard 50mm i want to use..

the reasons being is that i would like to get a better depth of field
in close-up interior shots.

does anybody know?

Don Palomaki · February 27th, 2002, 05:06 PM

To use the EF adapter you have to use an EF-compatible lens.

As to depth of field, you will get the depth of field associated with the lens, by the field of view will also correspond to that focal length. What this means is that a 200 mm lens will produce a field of view that is similar to a 1400 mm telephone on at 35 mm still camera. The 50mm similar to a 350 mm telephoto.

Adam Lawrence · February 27th, 2002, 05:37 PM

i see..

i assume EF lenses are readily available to buy individually?

how do you know what EF lenses are? what makes them differ from standard
35mm lenses?

if so i would be interested in buying the smallest mm size lense
to compinsate for the focal gain of the adapter. that way i wouldnt
have to shoot from far away to get the close up i would need.
is that possible?

thanks for the reply.

Adrian Douglas · February 27th, 2002, 11:59 PM

EF lenses are Canon lenses specifically for their EOS range of SLR cameras. They are buy no means a cheap lens. The widest lens in the EF range is a 14mm ultra ultra wide and will set you back around US$2200 + the EOS adapter. This will yeld aprox 105mm in 35mm terms.

In my opinion you'd be better off just getting the 3x wide lens made for the XL1. For more info read the Pappas Method article on the Watchdog.

March 1st, 2002, 01:04 AM

Hello, I will buy a Xl1S very soon, but I can't afford to buy the manual X16 Zoom (but I want a manual/mechanical focus).

I already bought a second hand EOS adapter, and after seeing the article on the "pappa's system", I thougt it might be possible to use an EOS Zoom instead of buying the expensive Canon manual X16. But...
there is the 7.2X factor on the adaptor.
So is there anyone to manage to get a system as the "pappa's system", but working with a zoom with the equivalent of a 40mm at wide position (or even larger?)

Let me know if there is a way to do this.
Thanks

Chris Hurd · March 1st, 2002, 09:31 PM

Just curious, which Canon 35mm EOS lenses do you have? You'll be giving up any ability to do smooth motorized zooms with this method. Plus you'll have nothing but telephoto focal lengths due to the 7.2x multiplication factor. The ability to use an EOS lens on the XL1 is mainly beneficial for wildlife and surveillance videography. Beyond that, it doesn't have much practical purpose. If you can't afford the 16x manual lens, then the standard 16x auto lens should serve you quite well. I use it all the time on paying jobs. Hope this helps,

Chris Hurd · March 1st, 2002, 09:37 PM

Due to the 7.2x multiplication factor of the focal length, using a Canon EOS lens on the XL1 will prevent you from doing any kind of serious indoor close-up work, unless you can position the camera from a long way away, down a long hall or several rooms over. Plus you'll need to add a lot of light. This particular set-up is best suited for outdoor long-distance wildlife or surveillance work. You'll have a difficult time using it indoors, and the close-ups will be *extreme* as in microscopic.

March 2nd, 2002, 03:03 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Just curious, which Canon 35mm EOS lenses do you have? You'll be giving up any ability to do smooth motorized zooms with this method. Plus you'll have nothing but telephoto focal lengths due to the 7.2x multiplication factor. -->>>

I've got a 28/70 and a 70/300, but I'm ready to buy a 15/80 or else if I can find a way to compensate the 7.2X adapter factor with a 0.3X converter or else.
In this particular case, I will have a 32/172 fully manual lens without the cost of the canon manual 16X, and added possibilities of the Eos adapter.
It sounds to me a pretty good solution, except I need to find a 0.3 converter which can be fit onto a widezoom photo lens.
I don't think something bigger (like a 0.2 converter :-) ) is existing.

If anyone know a good (and cheaper than canon 16X manual) combination of zoom photo lens and converter to fit on, I'll be glad to heard about it :-)

Adrian Douglas · March 2nd, 2002, 06:37 AM

I'm not sure if Canon have a 15-80 EF lens. The widest Zoom I'm aware of is a 16-35mm and it costs around the same as the 16x Manual Servo Lens. If I'm wrong please point me in the direction of the 15-80 as I'd be interested in it for my still work.

Don Palomaki · March 2nd, 2002, 08:35 AM

Everyone speak of the 7.2x focal length multiplier, as if it were a teleconverter.
Actually, the focal length remains essentailly the same, it is just that most lenses intended for a 35mm still camera are rather longer focal length than the video lenses used with the 1/3" CCD so the CCD sees a much narrower field of view. When enlarged to the same image size on the display it has a telephoto sort of effct.

Consider the standard lens at 5.5mm. It produces a field of view similar to a 40mm lens on a 35mm still camera, a field-of-view factor of about 7.2

February 18th, 2002, 03:00 AM	#31
Rick Banfield Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Australian Posts: 34	EF Lens use...att Larry Olsen esp. Just when I thought I had the answer! There is always another factor! Thank you, esp. Larry Olsen and I found your original inquiry and the replys from others. Today I was looking at the EF 70-200L f2.8 (fixed) IS USM Lens. Any comment about using this with a doubler on the front if avail..Century? as opposed to the 100-400L zoom same price here in Australia. How many f/stops do you lose with the EF adapter? The deer I film in NZ and Australia are nearly nocturnal and light is constantly a problem. I would not normally pan at long focal lengths, so would the stabilizer "do its job" for wind and "heartbeat pounding" whilst turned on, even with tripod mount? Regards from Phillip Island Australia Rick Banfield

February 18th, 2002, 06:47 AM	#32
Adrian Douglas Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Chigasaki, Japan. Posts: 1,660	Hey Rick, My aunt and uncle have a house there in Cowes, probably right next door to you. You won't lose F stops with the EF Adapter, the only thing that changes is the focal length. __________________ Adrian DVInfo.net Search for quick answers Where to buy? From the best in the business...DVInfo.net sponsors

February 27th, 2002, 11:58 AM	#36
Adam Lawrence _redone_ Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 224	ef adapter I was considering the canon EF adapter.. Will i be able to use any SLR lense? I have a 50-200mm zoom and a standard 50mm i want to use.. the reasons being is that i would like to get a better depth of field in close-up interior shots. does anybody know?

February 27th, 2002, 05:37 PM	#38
Adam Lawrence _redone_ Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 224	ef i see.. i assume EF lenses are readily available to buy individually? how do you know what EF lenses are? what makes them differ from standard 35mm lenses? if so i would be interested in buying the smallest mm size lense to compinsate for the focal gain of the adapter. that way i wouldnt have to shoot from far away to get the close up i would need. is that possible? thanks for the reply.

February 27th, 2002, 11:59 PM	#39
Adrian Douglas Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Chigasaki, Japan. Posts: 1,660	EF lenses are Canon lenses specifically for their EOS range of SLR cameras. They are buy no means a cheap lens. The widest lens in the EF range is a 14mm ultra ultra wide and will set you back around US$2200 + the EOS adapter. This will yeld aprox 105mm in 35mm terms. In my opinion you'd be better off just getting the 3x wide lens made for the XL1. For more info read the Pappas Method article on the Watchdog. __________________ Adrian DVInfo.net Search for quick answers Where to buy? From the best in the business...DVInfo.net sponsors

February 18th, 2002, 09:19 AM	#33
Rick Banfield Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Australian Posts: 34	Further to part of my last message...do you lose any light with EF adapter? Rick Banfield

February 18th, 2002, 12:26 PM	#34
Laza2usa Posts: n/a	Chris, the "hunting" this lens does is similar to what happens with the stock lens when OIS is turned on and the camera is mounted on a tripod, only much more pronounced. So I'm not sure if it is possible to use any lens with the IS turned on while mounted on a tripod. Anyway, I just leave the IS off. Plus it is much easier to focus this lens compared to the stock 16x. Even with this problem I have had some excellent results with the lens and I needed as much telephoto as I could get without turning it into a telescope. The main thing that helped was using a much sturdier tripod. I switched from a Bogen 503 to a Libec H60 made by Mathews and some good sticks.

February 18th, 2002, 12:42 PM	#35
Laza2usa Posts: n/a	Rick, there is no f stop loss with the EF adapter. The 100-400mm lens is 4.5 to 5.6 and that range is available when mounted on the Xl1. There is still a certain amount of "hunting" even without panning. It also is more pronounced at the extreme telephoto. I just leave the IS off and learn how to breath right. I don't have any experience with the Century doublers but the more glass you put in between the lens and the chip the more you will effect the overall quality of the pix. The quality of the picture from the 100-400mm is excellent.

February 27th, 2002, 05:06 PM	#37
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,487	To use the EF adapter you have to use an EF-compatible lens. As to depth of field, you will get the depth of field associated with the lens, by the field of view will also correspond to that focal length. What this means is that a 200 mm lens will produce a field of view that is similar to a 1400 mm telephone on at 35 mm still camera. The 50mm similar to a 350 mm telephoto.

March 1st, 2002, 01:04 AM	#40
Hitcher. Posts: n/a	Manual Zoom with Eos adapter Hello, I will buy a Xl1S very soon, but I can't afford to buy the manual X16 Zoom (but I want a manual/mechanical focus). I already bought a second hand EOS adapter, and after seeing the article on the "pappa's system", I thougt it might be possible to use an EOS Zoom instead of buying the expensive Canon manual X16. But... there is the 7.2X factor on the adaptor. So is there anyone to manage to get a system as the "pappa's system", but working with a zoom with the equivalent of a 40mm at wide position (or even larger?) Let me know if there is a way to do this. Thanks

March 1st, 2002, 09:31 PM	#41
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Just curious, which Canon 35mm EOS lenses do you have? You'll be giving up any ability to do smooth motorized zooms with this method. Plus you'll have nothing but telephoto focal lengths due to the 7.2x multiplication factor. The ability to use an EOS lens on the XL1 is mainly beneficial for wildlife and surveillance videography. Beyond that, it doesn't have much practical purpose. If you can't afford the 16x manual lens, then the standard 16x auto lens should serve you quite well. I use it all the time on paying jobs. Hope this helps, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

March 1st, 2002, 09:37 PM	#42
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Due to the 7.2x multiplication factor of the focal length, using a Canon EOS lens on the XL1 will prevent you from doing any kind of serious indoor close-up work, unless you can position the camera from a long way away, down a long hall or several rooms over. Plus you'll need to add a lot of light. This particular set-up is best suited for outdoor long-distance wildlife or surveillance work. You'll have a difficult time using it indoors, and the close-ups will be extreme as in microscopic. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

March 2nd, 2002, 03:03 AM	#43
Hitcher. Posts: n/a	<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Just curious, which Canon 35mm EOS lenses do you have? You'll be giving up any ability to do smooth motorized zooms with this method. Plus you'll have nothing but telephoto focal lengths due to the 7.2x multiplication factor. -->>> I've got a 28/70 and a 70/300, but I'm ready to buy a 15/80 or else if I can find a way to compensate the 7.2X adapter factor with a 0.3X converter or else. In this particular case, I will have a 32/172 fully manual lens without the cost of the canon manual 16X, and added possibilities of the Eos adapter. It sounds to me a pretty good solution, except I need to find a 0.3 converter which can be fit onto a widezoom photo lens. I don't think something bigger (like a 0.2 converter :-) ) is existing. If anyone know a good (and cheaper than canon 16X manual) combination of zoom photo lens and converter to fit on, I'll be glad to heard about it :-) Last edited by Hitcher.; March 2nd, 2002 at 03:17 AM.

March 2nd, 2002, 06:37 AM	#44
Adrian Douglas Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Chigasaki, Japan. Posts: 1,660	I'm not sure if Canon have a 15-80 EF lens. The widest Zoom I'm aware of is a 16-35mm and it costs around the same as the 16x Manual Servo Lens. If I'm wrong please point me in the direction of the 15-80 as I'd be interested in it for my still work. __________________ Adrian DVInfo.net Search for quick answers Where to buy? From the best in the business...DVInfo.net sponsors

March 2nd, 2002, 08:35 AM	#45
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,487	Everyone speak of the 7.2x focal length multiplier, as if it were a teleconverter. Actually, the focal length remains essentailly the same, it is just that most lenses intended for a 35mm still camera are rather longer focal length than the video lenses used with the 1/3" CCD so the CCD sees a much narrower field of view. When enlarged to the same image size on the display it has a telephoto sort of effct. Consider the standard lens at 5.5mm. It produces a field of view similar to a 40mm lens on a 35mm still camera, a field-of-view factor of about 7.2