lens quality

[Bill Pryor]

I'm reasonably certain the Sony lens is made by Zeiss, not Canon, but I can't document where I read that. I've found the lens on the 150s and 250s I've used are pretty good for an electronic lens. I think the standard lens on the XL1 is the weakest point of that camera. Canon makes good professional lenses and still camera lenses, but I don't think that same engineering goes into the electronic ones. Actually, I don't like any of the electronic lenses I've used, but the ones on the Sonys, at least the recent models, manage to retain back focus they way they are supposed to. I'd gladly pay another 500 bucks for any of the 1/3" chip cameras if they'd put the money into the lens. I'd give 'em 200 bucks for back focus adjustment, and another 300 for mechanical focusing.

[Frank Granovski]

Why would they get Zeiss to make their built-in lenses and get Kenko to make their adaptors? Never mind. :-))

[Bill Pryor]

Probably because Zeiss doesn't make adapters?
Or, maybe Kenko owns Zeiss which owns Burbleflork Industries, which owns Halliburton, which owns the U.S. Government, which owns Sony which outsources everything to India anyway?
And that makes about as much sense as attaching any importance to the name the manufacturers stick on the lenses on consumer/prosumer cameras. The Leica on a Panasonic has no relationship to legendary 35mm Leica lenses, other than the name of the company; and I'm sure the same goes for Zeiss and Canon, in relation to their "real" lenses.

[Frank Granovski]

Ah, thanks, Bill. :-))

[Bill Pryor]

You're welcome--always glad to add clarity and insight to the situation.

[Michael Bendixen]

So I'm getting the impression that the stock XL1 lens and the PD-150/170 lens, and the dvx-100 lens are in the same ballpark and the name doesn't mean a whole lot, right? It's enlightening to know because that's not the tune I hear on the "street".

[Frank Granovski]

That's exactly so, except when it comes to some consumer cams and their plastic lenses---and a few may even have "Zeiss" stamped on them. :-))

PS: keep up the good work, Bill!

[Jeff Donald]

The street is not a good place to get an education, at least about most things.

[Bill Pryor]

There are some things you can learn on the street, but learning about lenses on the street is much like learning about that other thing on the street--it'll cost ya and you will probably also get .....never mind, I better not pursue that bad analogy any further. Suffice to say that the internet's "street" is probably the most unreliable place in the world to get true facts about things. Opinions out the wazoo, but not too strong in the fact department.

You should also not believe everything I say, for that matter. I usually only speak from my own experience, and it is rather limited in many areas.

There is one thing I've noticed from hanging out on the DV camera boards for some time...it doesn't seem to matter which camera a person buys, when he talks about it, it is almost always the best camera ever made, in most cases it "looks just like film," and the other competing brands are totally crap. What is it about cameras that makes them like religion?

Oops, it's after 10...time for me to go take a cynicism pill.

[Frank Granovski]

...doesn't seem to matter which camera a person buys, when he talks about it, it is almost always the best camera ever made, in most cases it "looks just like film...."

You got that right too. My MX300 is the best consumer 3 chip ever made and in frame mode it does look like film. :-))

[Bill Pryor]

Heheheh--good one, but you need to renew the licensing fee for my ironically-challenged disclaimer.

Is anybody but me old enough to remember Kodak's VNF? Video News Film. A reversal 16mm film stock designed to look more like video.