HM700 Lens options

[John Mitchell]

Hi - has anyone compared the Canon 14x lens to the Fuji 17x lens - and if so which is better? I already own the Fuji 13x wide angle - do either of these lens compare to that one for quality?

And can anyone tell me why on B&H's website the models are listed with 24fps and US frame rates only? I thought all HM700 versions were identical in frame rate and raster size options.

thanks John

[Enzo Giobbé]

John,

I have had all three lenses (got rid of the Canon 14x).

In my tests (both real world and in my studio), the 17x is the best lens of the lot.

Although I am a huge Canon lens fan, the 14x looks like it was just made to replace the 16x lens (so as to not sell the 700 without a lens), and while it is a slightly better lens than the 16x (wider being the most significant), it has some serious CA and breathing problems, not to mention that flimsy plastic back focus ring.

The 13x lens is a great tool for tight quarters, but it doesn't like strong backlight situations.

Since you already have the 13x, keep it. If you want to add another lens to your stable, then go with the 17x and get a Century Optics IF .8x converter ( .8X IF WIDE ANGLE CONVERTER - Schneider Optics ) for it.

There isn't a hill of beans difference in the field of view between the 13x and the 17x with the .8x IF WA converter on the wide end, and they both have about the same amount of slight barrel distortion full wide. It's a much cheaper way to go (about half the price on the 'street), and in effect gives you a 17x4 lens.

Best of both worlds.

[John Mitchell]

Thanks Enzo - that is what I thought, which makes me want to get my 700 from B&H with the 17x Fuji but I'm worried about the US only framerates mentioned on their site.

I take it the Century optics is better than the JVC WA which came with my original kit..

[Enzo Giobbé]

Ciao John,

I have never tested the JVC WA, so I can't comment on that. I do know the .8X IF is a great converter, and vastly improved over the round series (even the later multi coated ones) that Century Optics produced.

The round series were great converters, but had some barrel distortion at full wide on broadcast lenses. The redesign of the lenses into the IF series (all multi coated) addressed both the barrel distortion issue and lens shading (they all have a matching matte box / filter holder assembly available now).

Because of the way the converter is truncated on the top and bottom, it's lighter than the round series, but unlike the round series, has to be aligned to the lens (set the lens full wide and open, rotate the converter until the barrel distortion is gone, then lock it down - only take a few seconds to do). When used on a 17X lens, no additional stiffening is needed, since the glass on the 17X goes all the way to the front edge of the lens.

The 700... The two 700's I purchased (legally, direct from Japan) had the "A" suffix, and would capture to class 10 SDHC cards in MP4 or MOV format right out of the box. They also had dead pixels right out of the box (most likely due the the air shipment).

In looking at my notes (I have since sold both of my 700s), at 35Mbps (1920x1080), I was able to capture at 24P, 25P, 60i, and 50i. Those were the only capture settings available to me. Also, there is no dial in undercrank or overcrank available at the 1920x1080 setting (or at least none that I could find).

At 35Mbps in 720P (1280x720) mode (native to the block), you can dial in overcrank and undercrank speeds (a real time & brain saver), and set the capture rate at 24P, 25P, 30P, 50P, and 60P. It also had 35Mbps capture settings for shooting interlaced 50i or 60i, but only in the 1440x1080 mode.

I doubt that JVC did not make the entire 700 series the same (as far as frame and captures settings go), so what is listed on the B&H Web site is probably an error.

I just thought that both the 700s I acquired had too much noise in both the 0 to 25IRE and 80 to 95IRE ranges when punched to film and projected on a professional screening room screen. Even with a good digital transfer the noise was still there, but less noticeable (probably due to more overall noise - the unsharp mask effect) when viewed under the same screening room circumstances with a digital projector. I never could get the noise to go away at both the top and bottom ends at the same time, even going so far as to use a #1 black net (black promist), detail at min, and DNR on (and off).

Hope that helps!

[John Mitchell]

Enzo, thanks for being so generous with information gained from real world experience.

Yeah, the noise is a worry and I don't really understand where it is getting in. My 101E is very clean if not particularly sensitive in low light. Given that the 700 (and 200/250 series) use the same CCD block it seems JVC has introduced noise during the processing to 1080 somewhere.

I'm hoping JVC will solve this problem, but unfortunately can't really wait for a new cam to come out.

Just quickly on the lens I notice that the Panny HPX300 comes with a 17x Fuji lens - but reports on that lens are not so good. So it seems Fujinon are making two different 1/3" 17x lenses. Very strange.

[John Mitchell]

OK I did a little further research and discovered that apparently the Panasonic HPX300 does indeed come with a different 17x stock lens to the JVC700. I can't confirm this because while the JVC option lens is listed on Fujnon's site the Panny's lens isn't

The JVC is listed as: FUJINON TH17x5BRM LENS

While the Panny's islisted as: XT17×4.5BRM-K14

At face value the Panasonic version is slightly wider at the wide end, but from all reports not in the same ballpark as the JVC version. It seems closer in quality to the original JVC 16x stock lens.

Why Fujinon is making 2 such closely aligned 1/3" lenses I wouldn't know, but only the JVC version is listed on their US website. I'm guessing it may be because of CCD v CMOS, but it is more likely a cost factor.

Could they be the same lens - don't know but I doubt it. Very different reports on both lenses.

[Eric Deyerler]

It`s a OEM-lens especially build for Panasonic.

The 14xCanon was built for JVC as OEM-lens, but after one year
the lens will be sold also direct by Canon, may be, the Fujinon will
also be sold separately like the Canon 14x.

It`s a different lens..

[John Mitchell]

Thanks for confirming that Eric

[Dan Magnafichi]

I've been following the discussion here and I have read other forums where they described lenses as having a "breathing" problem. Could anyone explain this to me in layman terms.

Thanks!

[Jack Walker]

Here is a short explanation on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breathing_(lens)

Basically, when you change the focus, it appears that you are also zooming in or out.

Small changes of focus to follow a target or slightly shift interest are okay. However, large changes of focus--as in rack focus type shots such as having a flower in focus in the close floreground and then rapidly changing to a person some distance away--will cause such a drastic change in the apparent focal length of the lens (zoom effect) that the shot is close to unusable.

[Myles Williams]

I found this thread and decided to get the Century(Schneider Optics) .8 lense and love it so far. I shoot alot of motorsports and are in the pits alot and needed the wider option. I also got the lense hood as well.

[B.J. Hjelholt]

Myles,

Where did you acquire your lens hood? We have a couple of those wide adapters and need that hood badly (lens flare city without the hood!)

Cheers,
B.J.

[Myles Williams]

https://www.schneideroptics.com/Ecom...=1080&IID=1341

Myles

[B.J. Hjelholt]

Cheers Myles,

Thanks
BJ