Canon XL 1.6 range extender at DVinfo.net

Pierre Vetsch · April 25th, 2002, 05:12 AM

I thinking about to buy the XL 1.6 range extender but I want to use it on the Canon 14x manual lense with my XL1. As it's not really an XL lense i wanted to known if it's possible or not and any feedback will be useful.

Thank you in advance
Pierre

Chris Hurd · April 25th, 2002, 07:09 AM

The Canon 14x manual lens is indeed an XL lens, and the 1.6x extender works perfectly with it. Hope this helps,

Jacques Mersereau · April 25th, 2002, 01:55 PM

Hi Chris,

Hope all went swell out in Vegas for you. Sorry I couldn't
attend this year. Hope I didn't miss too much.

Hey, did you ever get to talk with any canon gurus about which
canon 35mm lens would be the best choice to use with XL1?

If not, is there someone who might know what canon thinks?

Jeff Donald · April 25th, 2002, 05:54 PM

Hi,

I'm not sure what Canon thinks but I can give you some insight based on my experiences. I've been using Canon EOS EF lenses for 35mm since 1997. Prior to that I used Nikor lenses. Several Nikor lenses I used on my Betacam for wildlife documentaries. The first lens I used was the 35 - 350 Canon lens. The 10x range was great, and fairly versital considering the 7.2 conversion factor for magnification. The 35mm end becomes the equivlent to 250mm in 35mm terms. It's downside was weight and it wasn't very fast.

I've used the 70 - 200mm F2.8 (limited range and it did not balance well) 300mm F4 (very limited range, but some great shots combined with my 1.4x and 2x teleconvertors) 28 - 135 IS ( very good lens, extends the range of the 16x normal lens) is compact, sharp and fairly afordable.

My current favorite lens is the 100 - 400 IS. It balances very nicely, is faster than the 35 - 350, covers a great range and works with both my teleconvertors. I use it for long shots of birds on the water, nesting etc. anywhere I can't get close to my subject. I use the 28 - 135 IS for most of my flight shots. It gives me a better range as the hawks fly towards me. I loose them with the long lens.

Jeff

Chris Hurd · April 25th, 2002, 07:45 PM

Jacques, hope we can hook up at some other event. Jeff's response has some pretty good feedback regarding EOS lenses. Hope that helps,

Pierre Vetsch · April 26th, 2002, 02:53 AM

Thank Chris for answer about the XL 1,6.

Any ideas about the price for EF100-400 IS in US

Jeff Donald · April 26th, 2002, 06:18 AM

If you want a US warranty expect to pay $1500 and up, give or take a few dollars. Grey market with International Warranty (No US warranty) are $1300 and up. As always buyer beware if you are not familiar with the dealer or the deal is just too good to be true.

Jeff

Pierre Vetsch · April 26th, 2002, 08:57 AM

Thank for the indication for the price and the comments.

One more thing: with the lens EF100-400IS do you have really reach a good stabilization ? Because I use with a good tripod (cartoni) a 200 mm of Canon (fixed len) and i 'm always a bit disappointed by the bad stabilazation working outside with often some wind.
Best regards
Pierre

Jacques Mersereau · April 26th, 2002, 10:17 AM

Hey Chris,

I might go to showbiz expo coming up in about a month.
You attending that show?

Back to glass. The 100-400IS is at the front of the line, but
I too am wondering about the advertised "3rd Generation"
image stabilizer, which is supposed to offer the choice of
vertical stabilization only, or both horizontal and vertical.

Does this lens offer that, and if so, vertical only is supposed to aid
when trying panning, though it still seems that at full zoom in,
a 3500mm would be almost impossible to pan and get anything
useable. Anyone?

Bruce Moore · May 1st, 2002, 09:16 PM

Pierre,

I use the 1.6x with both the original 16x lens and the 14x manual lens. Love it! With either lens I get some Fantastic lunar shots, I don't think you'll be disappointed. The 16x goes to 1000mm and when you consider the size and weight of the 1.6 extender, why would you want to carry the extre weight. I have 2 Nikon F-5's and when I put my 500mm AF f/4.5 on it it weighs a ton. Pray tell,why would you want the nice, light XL-1 to be extremely front heavy and conspicuous?

These are only my thoughts on why I kove the 1.6x and how it works for me. Hope it helps.

Bruce

Pierre Vetsch · May 3rd, 2002, 11:13 PM

Hello Bruce,

Your comments are very relevants: the final weight with all the items are often very crucial for the mobility as I use my Xl1 mainly to film volcanic activity so I need all the stuff om my back.

Thank again
Pierre

Bruce Moore · May 3rd, 2002, 11:19 PM

Pierre,
Do you need a baggage boy?

Bruce Moore · May 3rd, 2002, 11:25 PM

Pierre,
At second thought, I'll use my 1.6 extender and video you from afar, running from the lava bombs.

Pierre Vetsch · May 4th, 2002, 01:51 AM

Hey Bruce,

The only good way to film volcanoes it's when you heard hissing the volcanic bombs around you...to be serious (and i'm not paid by Canon or by anyone)the XL1 is rather strong and versatile because I used it in rough conditions (hot temperature, lot of dust....) and it keeps the way.
All the Best
Pierre

Jacques Mersereau · May 4th, 2002, 08:06 AM

Howdy,

I am still wondering if _Canon_ recommends any lens like the
100-400?

Anyone going to show biz in LA June 1-3?

April 25th, 2002, 05:12 AM	#1
Pierre Vetsch New Boot Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Geneva, Switzerland Posts: 23	Canon XL 1.6 range extender I thinking about to buy the XL 1.6 range extender but I want to use it on the Canon 14x manual lense with my XL1. As it's not really an XL lense i wanted to known if it's possible or not and any feedback will be useful. Thank you in advance Pierre

April 25th, 2002, 07:09 AM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	The Canon 14x manual lens is indeed an XL lens, and the 1.6x extender works perfectly with it. Hope this helps, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

April 25th, 2002, 01:55 PM	#3
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	Hi Chris, Hope all went swell out in Vegas for you. Sorry I couldn't attend this year. Hope I didn't miss too much. Hey, did you ever get to talk with any canon gurus about which canon 35mm lens would be the best choice to use with XL1? If not, is there someone who might know what canon thinks? __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager

April 25th, 2002, 07:45 PM	#5
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Jacques, hope we can hook up at some other event. Jeff's response has some pretty good feedback regarding EOS lenses. Hope that helps, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

April 26th, 2002, 10:17 AM	#9
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	Hey Chris, I might go to showbiz expo coming up in about a month. You attending that show? Back to glass. The 100-400IS is at the front of the line, but I too am wondering about the advertised "3rd Generation" image stabilizer, which is supposed to offer the choice of vertical stabilization only, or both horizontal and vertical. Does this lens offer that, and if so, vertical only is supposed to aid when trying panning, though it still seems that at full zoom in, a 3500mm would be almost impossible to pan and get anything useable. Anyone? __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager

April 25th, 2002, 05:54 PM	#4
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Hi, I'm not sure what Canon thinks but I can give you some insight based on my experiences. I've been using Canon EOS EF lenses for 35mm since 1997. Prior to that I used Nikor lenses. Several Nikor lenses I used on my Betacam for wildlife documentaries. The first lens I used was the 35 - 350 Canon lens. The 10x range was great, and fairly versital considering the 7.2 conversion factor for magnification. The 35mm end becomes the equivlent to 250mm in 35mm terms. It's downside was weight and it wasn't very fast. I've used the 70 - 200mm F2.8 (limited range and it did not balance well) 300mm F4 (very limited range, but some great shots combined with my 1.4x and 2x teleconvertors) 28 - 135 IS ( very good lens, extends the range of the 16x normal lens) is compact, sharp and fairly afordable. My current favorite lens is the 100 - 400 IS. It balances very nicely, is faster than the 35 - 350, covers a great range and works with both my teleconvertors. I use it for long shots of birds on the water, nesting etc. anywhere I can't get close to my subject. I use the 28 - 135 IS for most of my flight shots. It gives me a better range as the hawks fly towards me. I loose them with the long lens. Jeff

April 26th, 2002, 02:53 AM	#6
Pierre Vetsch New Boot Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Geneva, Switzerland Posts: 23	Thank Chris for answer about the XL 1,6. Any ideas about the price for EF100-400 IS in US

April 26th, 2002, 06:18 AM	#7
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	If you want a US warranty expect to pay $1500 and up, give or take a few dollars. Grey market with International Warranty (No US warranty) are $1300 and up. As always buyer beware if you are not familiar with the dealer or the deal is just too good to be true. Jeff

April 26th, 2002, 08:57 AM	#8
Pierre Vetsch New Boot Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Geneva, Switzerland Posts: 23	Thank for the indication for the price and the comments. One more thing: with the lens EF100-400IS do you have really reach a good stabilization ? Because I use with a good tripod (cartoni) a 200 mm of Canon (fixed len) and i 'm always a bit disappointed by the bad stabilazation working outside with often some wind. Best regards Pierre

May 1st, 2002, 09:16 PM	#10
Bruce Moore Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Glendale, AZ Posts: 57	Pierre, I use the 1.6x with both the original 16x lens and the 14x manual lens. Love it! With either lens I get some Fantastic lunar shots, I don't think you'll be disappointed. The 16x goes to 1000mm and when you consider the size and weight of the 1.6 extender, why would you want to carry the extre weight. I have 2 Nikon F-5's and when I put my 500mm AF f/4.5 on it it weighs a ton. Pray tell,why would you want the nice, light XL-1 to be extremely front heavy and conspicuous? These are only my thoughts on why I kove the 1.6x and how it works for me. Hope it helps. Bruce

May 3rd, 2002, 11:13 PM	#11
Pierre Vetsch New Boot Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Geneva, Switzerland Posts: 23	Hello Bruce, Your comments are very relevants: the final weight with all the items are often very crucial for the mobility as I use my Xl1 mainly to film volcanic activity so I need all the stuff om my back. Thank again Pierre

May 3rd, 2002, 11:19 PM	#12
Bruce Moore Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Glendale, AZ Posts: 57	Pierre, Do you need a baggage boy?

May 3rd, 2002, 11:25 PM	#13
Bruce Moore Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Glendale, AZ Posts: 57	Pierre, At second thought, I'll use my 1.6 extender and video you from afar, running from the lava bombs.

May 4th, 2002, 01:51 AM	#14
Pierre Vetsch New Boot Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Geneva, Switzerland Posts: 23	Hey Bruce, The only good way to film volcanoes it's when you heard hissing the volcanic bombs around you...to be serious (and i'm not paid by Canon or by anyone)the XL1 is rather strong and versatile because I used it in rough conditions (hot temperature, lot of dust....) and it keeps the way. All the Best Pierre

May 4th, 2002, 08:06 AM	#15
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	Howdy, I am still wondering if _Canon_ recommends any lens like the 100-400? Anyone going to show biz in LA June 1-3? __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager