Please help with this one!!

Greetings folks!
I will buy an XL1S this week but I'm very confused about which manual lens should I get with the package.
The new 16x manual look good but I hate the idea of the iris ring on the camera body.Also it has no wide angle adapter for it as yet.It's also the most expensive (I think it's over priced)

The old 14x looks good.They can be bought for good prices now.It doesn't have servo but I don't care.It works like a normal pro lens.

The Optex does not talk to the camera's electronics and has no servo either(any other negative points for this one).But I've read it's the sharpest between the three since it's a real pro lens.The Canon 16x and 14x manual are still just manual "prosumer" lenses.Is it true?

Well, I don't care about servo or the electronics FX (I'll still have the standard 16x as well). I just want to know which one is the Sharpest lens.Also which one is the best to work with.
Any inputs will be greatly appreciated. Any pros and cons on the three lenses would really help.I searched the prior posts and read the articles on the watchdog but didn't find out which one were the sharpest.

Thanks a lot!

Eduard

[Ken Tanaka]

I doubt that you'll find many folks who have actually tried-out both the Optex and the Canon manual lenses. Chris Hurd, this site's owner, is the only person that comes to mind...perhaps he'll chime in.

Note that the "Optex" lens is actually a converted Fujinon professional lens (see the XL1 Watchdog site at http://dvinfo.net/xl1.htm ).

I have the 14x manula lens and like it very much. Having no server it is relatively lightweight. Indeed, iris, zoom and focus are all on the lens barrel. It relays settings back to the XL1s but that's about it. It holds very sharp focus once you set the back-focus properly. If you're serious about not wanting any servos and wanting all adjustments on the lens body snap up a 14x lens while you can. Having been discontinued for many months they're getting harder to find.

[Kai Leibrandt]

I jost got the 16x manual a few days ago, and already I can't image how I shot before with the 16x IS lens. Sure, there's no IS, but with a bit of practice (and a couple of 945 batteries on the MA-100) it's actually quite stable, even fully zoomed in.
I can't compare to the older 14x (never tried it), but like you I thought the iris-on-the-camera issue might hinder me, but in fact I'm now pleased it's on the camera, no need to change my habits :-)
The main thing that makes it more desirable to me than the 16x IS is the fully manual focus with calibration and ditto zoom (even though it has a servo, you can switch it off and use a calibrated scale on the barrel). Very handy in low light conditions when it might be difficult to focus otherwise.
Also nice about the 16x manual vs. the 14x manual is the fact that while the front lens element still rotates, the filter thread doesn't, so you can use pol and grad filters without having to worry about them twisting all over the place.
In terms of picture quality; I'm shooting some comparison shots with resolution chart over the next couple of days, and Chris permitting I'll post them in another article.
I could not do without it anymore.
HTH

Kai.

[Jay Henderson]

i too would very much appreciate a facts-based or experience-based answer to the question posed at the top of this thread:

i quote:
"But I've read it's the sharpest between the three since it's a real pro lens.The Canon 16x and 14x manual are still just manual "prosumer" lenses.Is it true?"

for those of us who are convinced we need a manual lens (in my case for the PAL XL1), but do not know which of the THREE CHOICES to go with, can you guys out there who know what you're talking about tell us:

which of the three manual lens options is the best (the new 16x manual by Canon, the old 14x manual by Canon, or the old Fujinon/Optex 14x manual)...in OBJECTIVE terms, please. if you just really like a certain lens because it fits your style, that's not what i'm talking about. i'm looking for what lens is the sharpest; what lens gives the best picture.

BTW: i already have the old 16x auto lens that comes with the XL1.

are all three of the lenses multi-coated glass?

p.s. i already know that the 16x manual is great, and "better" than the automatics. i'm interested in a comparison of the three manual lenses...or comparisons of two of them, etc.

[Chris Hurd]

>> The Canon 16x and 14x manual are still just manual "prosumer" lenses. Is it true?" <<

Not true. Both are professional lenses built by the Canon broadcast video lens division.

>> i'm looking for what lens is the sharpest; what lens gives the best picture. <<

Seriously, I don't think you'll be able to detect any difference in image quality between these three lenses. They're all pretty much equal in the optical quality department.

>> are all three of the lenses multi-coated glass? <<

Yes. Hope this helps,

[Jeff Donald]

I've shot with two of the three (don't know any one with a Optex/Fuji). I own the 14x and have borrowed a friends 16x. I can not see any appreciable difference in the sharpness or resolution of the two lenses. I own the EF adapter for Canon EOS lenses and I do notice a sharper picture with the EOS lenses. However, the 7.2x magnification factor does not make the lenses usefull except for nature work. There are some articles here on adapting the EOS lenses for more "normal" work with the use of wide angle converters and such.

The 14x is perhaps the better buy. They can be found used on ebay from time to time (around $700). As always buyer beware. The 16x can be purchased from several of the sponsors here.

Jeff

[Jay Henderson]

thanks guys. this helps. looks like i'm going with the canon 14x, because it's a lot cheaper than the new 16x manual and i think it's cheaper than the fujinon/optex 14x manual, also. i'll have to keep shopping around.