Canon 1.6 lens extender adapter for XL1S

[Ed Baatz]

I would like to buy the 1.6X extender but for some reason it has been on back-order at B&H for several weeks (more than four) now. Is there another dealer who sells these adapters (for a reasonable price)?

Maybe this is not unusual for B&H? Or, is it common for Canon products in general to be back-ordered for so long? I hope that Canon didn't just decide to stop making these adapters...

They are useful for increasing the zoom range while maintaining the electronic XL lens functioning aren't they?

== Ed ==

[Duncan Wilson]

Ed
Assuming your last question was not rhetorical, the 1.6x extender does increase focal length while maintaining all the electronic functions (ND filter, image stabiliser, autofocus etc) that we all hate...I mean love.
Cheers
Duncan

[Ed Baatz]

Duncan,

I believe I might have found someplace I can buy the adapter... Another forum sponsor (evsonline.com) apparently has it in stock? I'm going to call them today to check before I order it.

My poorly phrased question was intended to be less rhetorical and aimed more towards asking if this adapter was actually very useful (really worth getting).

Maybe the reason B&H can't seem to get them in stock is because they are selling them faster than Canon can manufacture them? [grin]

Thanks for the reply and verifying that the normal XL lens functions work with the adapter...

== Ed ==

[Jacques Mersereau]

Hey Ed,

I have a 1.6 adaptor that I'd be willing to sell. I used it only
a few times . . . brand new condition.

If you're interested let me know.

jacmer@umich.edu

[A. J. deLange]

I've never (in still photography) met a telextender that I liked - they always soften the image noticeably. How does this one do in that regard?

A.J.

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

Sorry for my ignorance but... is the purpose of this accesory to allow one to convert EOS lenses into lenses you can actually use with the XL1?

[Duncan Wilson]

Hi Ignacio

No - the 1.6x extender doesn't allow you to fit EOS lenses. All it does is increase the focal length of the standard XL lens by a factor of 1.6.

Quality wise, I don't think it's too bad - I haven't noticed significant loss in resolution. Not that I have done any critical tests to prove this - just my impression, and others may disagree.

Whether it's useful depends on your needs. If you want more focal length, and you want to retain features such as autofocus, electronic zoom, IS etc, then it is obviously useful. Personally, I prefer to use the EF adapter and EOS lenses to achieve greater focal length. I think you get noticeably better image quality than with the standard XL lens. Of course, you lose autofocus, IS etc but this doesn't matter to me.

Regards
Duncan

[Jacques Mersereau]

<<<I've never (in still photography) met a telextender that I liked - they always soften the image noticeably. How does this one do in that regard?

A.J.>>>>

You're right A.J.,

the same is true with the 1.6x. All extenders do soften the image . . . it's a "feature" ;)
The same is true with the 2X I use with the EOS adapter and 100-400mm EF lens.

That said, I used the 1.6 w/ the 16X and got great results, especially in a couple
of weddings we did for family members. With the extender I was able to
get some really nice closeups of the bride and groom. The softness factor
was unnoticeable (much like a filter it made the bride's skin smooth as a baby's)
and the shallow depth of focus the 1.6x provides rocks. Personally
I like the 1.6x 'look' when shooting people.

In wildlife videography, the slight softening of the image by
extenders is not a good thing, but you have to "pick your poison".
Which means, you can have a small bird
in a slightly sharper image or a large bird that is slightly soft. Most times
I'll pick the softer large bird. Lots of light is key to getting the most out of
any extender, though the 1.6X doesn't require as much as my EOS rig.

<<<I prefer to use the EF adapter and EOS lenses to achieve greater focal length. I think you get noticeably better image quality than with the standard XL lens . . . (edit)
Regards
Duncan -->>>

For wildlife videography, YES. But, there is no way I would want to take
my EOS and 100-400mm rig to a wedding or interview as the
wide out on that combo is just about what the 1.6X/16X is FULLY ZOOMED in.
There is no doubt the 35mm Canon glass is WAY better than the standard 16X.

It all depends on what your trying to accomplish and budget.
The 1.6 Canon extender is another useful tool for those shooting with
Canon video lens.