Telephoto adaptor lens at DVinfo.net

Greg Hawkes · July 24th, 2009, 02:23 AM

Does anybody know if a lens adaptor for the EX1 exists which will increase the telephoto end and can be zoomed through from the wide setting?

The standard x 14 zoom is fine in most situations but occassionally working at some distance from the stage it is not good enough.

Matthew Hurley · July 24th, 2009, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Hawkes

Does anybody know if a lens adaptor for the EX1 exists which will increase the telephoto end and can be zoomed through from the wide setting?

The standard x 14 zoom is fine in most situations but occassionally working at some distance from the stage it is not good enough.

Century precision optics makes a 2X tele-converter specifically for the EX1. I does vignette @ the widest setting and is a VERY heavy lens. Price is around $1550.

Boyd Ostroff · July 25th, 2009, 04:35 PM

I can't imagine that any adaptor exists which you can zoom through for the full range - it would have to be the diameter of a pizza! I have the Century 1.6x adaptor for my Z1, which is this same lens with a different mount: 1.6X TELE-CONVERTER HD EX1/EX3 - Schneider Optics. Have been using it for about 4 years shooting performance video at a distance of over 100 feet from the stage and have been very happy.

On the Z1 I can zoom out about halfway before it starts clipping off the corners - I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit more limited on the EX1. Here are a couple examples I did with the Z1 when I first got the lens. You can see some noticeable CA on the phone poles in this example, but to be fair, I think the 1.6x lens is mostly magnifying the CA which already exists on the Z1's lens.

It's a big, heavy chunk of glass! The 2x looks very cool but even bigger and heavier, and it will vignette sooner as you zoom out... nature of the beast.

Doug Jensen · July 25th, 2009, 05:54 PM

I own the Schneider 1.6x adapter for the EX1/EX3 and I would highly recommend it.
As I demonstrate on my EX3 training DVD, you can only zoom out about 50% before you start to see vignetting, but I find that perfectly acceptable for an adapter of this type and price range. It is very sharp and I don't think you lose any light at all. It even uses the EX1/EX3 bayonnet mount so you only have to rotate it about a 1/4 turn to mount and unmount.

For the EX1, the Schneider adapter is really the only affordable telephoto option you have. But for the EX3, I now prefer to use an Adaptimax-Plus with one of Nikon zoom lenses.
Adaptimax Plus - Nikon Lens Adapter

Greg Hawkes · July 27th, 2009, 12:52 AM

Many thanks for the reply guys

Daniel Zenzel · November 20th, 2009, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Hurley

Century precision optics makes a 2X tele-converter specifically for the EX1. I does vignette @ the widest setting and is a VERY heavy lens. Price is around $1550.

I just ordered the EX1R and am considering the 2X. I assume the vignetting is at the wide-end, not at full tele, right? Do you know at about what point vignetting starts/stops?

In terms of 35mm equivalents..... with this on, approx 700-800mm? If anyone has any examples of the 2X, I'd like to see them....

Also, with the 2X, I assume that the front lens cover is OFF to use?

thanks

Mark OConnell · November 20th, 2009, 02:33 PM

Hey Boyd thanks for posting the images. If you, or Doug, could post one or two with more brightly lit detail I'd love to see them.

Boyd Ostroff · November 21st, 2009, 12:24 PM

I have a lot of live performance video which was shot on the z1 with the Century 1.6x. However, I'm not sure this is the same glass as the EX1 version, and obviously there are significant differences between these cameras!

I am quite happy with this lens, but the chromatic abberation on the edge of a contrasty figure can be pretty noticeable under certain conditions. Some of this may just be magnification of what already exists with the stock z1 lens.

Here's a clip, albeit at 640x360 with h.264 compression for YouTube. When I'm back in the office next week I can post a couple full resolution frames if you like.

YouTube - Porgy and Bess, Philadelphia 2007

Mark OConnell · November 21st, 2009, 04:20 PM

That looks pretty good but, as you point out, it's with a different camera and a different version of the converter. Hopefully somebody can post something shot with the EX1 and its specific converter. I emailed Schneider Optics and asked if they could post a few more samples. Seems odd that all they have on their site is a single, small still image.

Ben Hogan · November 22nd, 2009, 11:32 AM

I've been using the 1.6 tele adapter with not as desirable results. I've attempted to attach two stills showing what I'm capturing with the tele attached. This is shot with an EX1 at 1440x1080 60i mode. I'm shooting speakers on a stage and zoomed in all the way. The frame is focused in the center and then slowly loses sharpness as you move away in a circular pattern. I can adjust center of the focus so I can have the speaker's face sharp but then it slowly goes out of focus from there. These stills show that hopefully well enough. And I took frames where the speaker is still for that frame so it should all be sharp or sharper than if her hands were moving, etc. I can take frames from without the tele and it will all look similar to the sharpness you have around her face. Anyway, hopefully the pics will be able to show it will enough what I'm talking about.If I'm at about 85% zoom then most of the frame is consistent, but if I go in 100% I see that effect. But at 85% zoom it's like being at 100% without the adapter so what's the reason to use it at that point?

If you pan down the speaker, her face is good focus, but then towards the bottom it is considerably more out of focus. The flowers in the back in the one frame is way out of focus, now given they are behind her and this is the EX1 so DOF is a factor but check out how fuzzy it is at the bottom and then not as fuzzy towards the top or outward. Again the flowers are sticking out more than the vase but it's more out of focus than just being DOF.

Also, there is no IR filter on the camera. That's the EX1 with just a 1.6 Schneider Optics adapter. The curtain is black and that is a brown shirt she is wearing.

I have not be satisfied with my results using this adapter.

Andrew Stone · November 22nd, 2009, 11:53 AM

Doug the Adaptimax-Plus adapter you are selling is a great product. I wish it was around when I bought my EX-3/Nikon adapter ring.

-Andrew

Olof Ekbergh · November 22nd, 2009, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Hogan

I've been using the 1.6 tele adapter with not as desirable results. I've attempted to attach two stills showing what I'm capturing with the tele attached. This is shot with an EX1 at 1440x1080 60i mode.

What was the aperture setting?

I would be very interested in seeing shots of a flat brick wall or similar shot flat on with different f-stops. And 1920x1080P would be nice too.

Or even just a bunch of back focus charts on a studio wall (or a real resolution card). This would be a more accurate way of judging the lens.

If you could do this it would help me or anyone else thinking about this adapter.

Thanks.

Ben Hogan · November 23rd, 2009, 12:20 AM

Yes, I know that's not a real accurate test of the adapter. My posting is just how I'm using it in a real world situation and that the results I'm getting are not desirable for me. I've been shooting speakers on stages every month. I try to stay as far back from the stage as possible. Sometimes I can be closer so I don't need an adapter but most times it would be better if I did to keep that distance further back. I've shot both ways and with the adapter I have noticed out of focus portions of the frame, as I described. Where a focal point is in the middle and then a radius outside of that it gets out of focus the more I am zoomed in. I understand for what it is, it's probably decent results? but I prefer to have most of my frame in focus, so being zoomed in all the way with the adapter is yielding undesirable results for me. And I need to be all the way zoomed in, otherwise the adapter is not really useful for my intent. The face can be in focus but things such as hands and objects around them, i.e. two people on stage it gets a bit fuzzy on the outer regions of the frame.

I shoot in SP 60i due to the length of the event and that most of the footage will probably never be used. They broadcast the video on screens live for the audience and for the professional look it gives the seminar. We record the event so for the sake of harddrive archiving, been using SP 60i. I'm usually at f/2.4-2.8 and sometimes have the gain at 3db. I try not to use any gain, but the seminars are not in the same place every time so lighting tends to change, as does my distance from the stage. I try to stay consistent every time. For $800 for the x1.6 I don't feel like I'm getting the results I was hoping for. Just my opinion from using it over the past 6 months.

Olof Ekbergh · November 23rd, 2009, 07:50 AM

Are you projecting SD?

It seems strange that this lens would not be good enough for SD.

I would do a few tests with charts. You may have a bad lens.

Have you talked with your dealer?

For this type of live screen SD. I would rather be using a DSR500/300 type of camera. It is a lot heavier so it will be much steadier and you could archive the tapes easily.

You can easily get these cams used and the standard lenses are much longer, plus the lenses are interchangeable.

Ben Hogan · November 23rd, 2009, 12:15 PM

What's on the screen is SD. I'm going out the HD/SDI to a switcher. I send the HD signal, I want to record in HD. The signal on the screens looks fine in SD. That's not my concern. The concern is what's being recorded. No haven't talked to the dealer, bought this through B&H. Could be a bad lens, as I'm not happy with the results.

I wouldn't invest in a SD camera, these seminars are not my only business and in a perfect world I'd buy one of the new 350s coming out using SxS but economics aren't in my favor at the moment.

I'm through with tape. I haven't used tape in over a year. I don't hate tape but I can work a lot faster without it. Shoot, Ingest, Edit...simple. My office is shrinking without the need for decks and storage for tapes. A few harddrives for multiple copies(back-ups) of work and it's all good. First flat screen monitors now tapeless cameras, I'll be able to work out of closet before too long, haha, kidding, I keep my clients that don't pay on time in there...

July 24th, 2009, 02:23 AM	#1
Greg Hawkes Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Basingstoke Posts: 83	Telephoto adaptor lens Does anybody know if a lens adaptor for the EX1 exists which will increase the telephoto end and can be zoomed through from the wide setting? The standard x 14 zoom is fine in most situations but occassionally working at some distance from the stage it is not good enough.

July 25th, 2009, 04:35 PM	#3
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,790	I can't imagine that any adaptor exists which you can zoom through for the full range - it would have to be the diameter of a pizza! I have the Century 1.6x adaptor for my Z1, which is this same lens with a different mount: 1.6X TELE-CONVERTER HD EX1/EX3 - Schneider Optics. Have been using it for about 4 years shooting performance video at a distance of over 100 feet from the stage and have been very happy. On the Z1 I can zoom out about halfway before it starts clipping off the corners - I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit more limited on the EX1. Here are a couple examples I did with the Z1 when I first got the lens. You can see some noticeable CA on the phone poles in this example, but to be fair, I think the 1.6x lens is mostly magnifying the CA which already exists on the Z1's lens. It's a big, heavy chunk of glass! The 2x looks very cool but even bigger and heavier, and it will vignette sooner as you zoom out... nature of the beast. Attached Thumbnails

July 25th, 2009, 05:54 PM	#4
Doug Jensen Vortex Media Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 3,435	I own the Schneider 1.6x adapter for the EX1/EX3 and I would highly recommend it. As I demonstrate on my EX3 training DVD, you can only zoom out about 50% before you start to see vignetting, but I find that perfectly acceptable for an adapter of this type and price range. It is very sharp and I don't think you lose any light at all. It even uses the EX1/EX3 bayonnet mount so you only have to rotate it about a 1/4 turn to mount and unmount. For the EX1, the Schneider adapter is really the only affordable telephoto option you have. But for the EX3, I now prefer to use an Adaptimax-Plus with one of Nikon zoom lenses. Adaptimax Plus - Nikon Lens Adapter __________________ Vortex Media http://www.vortexmedia.com/ Sony FS7, F55, and XDCAM training videos, field guides, and other production tools

November 20th, 2009, 02:33 PM	#7
Mark OConnell Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Seattle WA Posts: 420	Hey Boyd thanks for posting the images. If you, or Doug, could post one or two with more brightly lit detail I'd love to see them. __________________ http://www.markoconnell.org

November 21st, 2009, 04:20 PM	#9
Mark OConnell Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Seattle WA Posts: 420	That looks pretty good but, as you point out, it's with a different camera and a different version of the converter. Hopefully somebody can post something shot with the EX1 and its specific converter. I emailed Schneider Optics and asked if they could post a few more samples. Seems odd that all they have on their site is a single, small still image. __________________ http://www.markoconnell.org

July 27th, 2009, 12:52 AM	#5
Greg Hawkes Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Basingstoke Posts: 83	Many thanks for the reply guys

November 21st, 2009, 12:24 PM	#8
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,790	I have a lot of live performance video which was shot on the z1 with the Century 1.6x. However, I'm not sure this is the same glass as the EX1 version, and obviously there are significant differences between these cameras! I am quite happy with this lens, but the chromatic abberation on the edge of a contrasty figure can be pretty noticeable under certain conditions. Some of this may just be magnification of what already exists with the stock z1 lens. Here's a clip, albeit at 640x360 with h.264 compression for YouTube. When I'm back in the office next week I can post a couple full resolution frames if you like. YouTube - Porgy and Bess, Philadelphia 2007

November 22nd, 2009, 11:32 AM	#10
Ben Hogan Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Grapevine Texas Posts: 27	I've been using the 1.6 tele adapter with not as desirable results. I've attempted to attach two stills showing what I'm capturing with the tele attached. This is shot with an EX1 at 1440x1080 60i mode. I'm shooting speakers on a stage and zoomed in all the way. The frame is focused in the center and then slowly loses sharpness as you move away in a circular pattern. I can adjust center of the focus so I can have the speaker's face sharp but then it slowly goes out of focus from there. These stills show that hopefully well enough. And I took frames where the speaker is still for that frame so it should all be sharp or sharper than if her hands were moving, etc. I can take frames from without the tele and it will all look similar to the sharpness you have around her face. Anyway, hopefully the pics will be able to show it will enough what I'm talking about.If I'm at about 85% zoom then most of the frame is consistent, but if I go in 100% I see that effect. But at 85% zoom it's like being at 100% without the adapter so what's the reason to use it at that point? If you pan down the speaker, her face is good focus, but then towards the bottom it is considerably more out of focus. The flowers in the back in the one frame is way out of focus, now given they are behind her and this is the EX1 so DOF is a factor but check out how fuzzy it is at the bottom and then not as fuzzy towards the top or outward. Again the flowers are sticking out more than the vase but it's more out of focus than just being DOF. Also, there is no IR filter on the camera. That's the EX1 with just a 1.6 Schneider Optics adapter. The curtain is black and that is a brown shirt she is wearing. I have not be satisfied with my results using this adapter. Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Ben Hogan; November 22nd, 2009 at 11:38 AM. Reason: need more info added

November 22nd, 2009, 11:53 AM	#11
Andrew Stone Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 975	Doug the Adaptimax-Plus adapter you are selling is a great product. I wish it was around when I bought my EX-3/Nikon adapter ring. -Andrew

November 23rd, 2009, 12:20 AM	#13
Ben Hogan Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Grapevine Texas Posts: 27	Yes, I know that's not a real accurate test of the adapter. My posting is just how I'm using it in a real world situation and that the results I'm getting are not desirable for me. I've been shooting speakers on stages every month. I try to stay as far back from the stage as possible. Sometimes I can be closer so I don't need an adapter but most times it would be better if I did to keep that distance further back. I've shot both ways and with the adapter I have noticed out of focus portions of the frame, as I described. Where a focal point is in the middle and then a radius outside of that it gets out of focus the more I am zoomed in. I understand for what it is, it's probably decent results? but I prefer to have most of my frame in focus, so being zoomed in all the way with the adapter is yielding undesirable results for me. And I need to be all the way zoomed in, otherwise the adapter is not really useful for my intent. The face can be in focus but things such as hands and objects around them, i.e. two people on stage it gets a bit fuzzy on the outer regions of the frame. I shoot in SP 60i due to the length of the event and that most of the footage will probably never be used. They broadcast the video on screens live for the audience and for the professional look it gives the seminar. We record the event so for the sake of harddrive archiving, been using SP 60i. I'm usually at f/2.4-2.8 and sometimes have the gain at 3db. I try not to use any gain, but the seminars are not in the same place every time so lighting tends to change, as does my distance from the stage. I try to stay consistent every time. For $800 for the x1.6 I don't feel like I'm getting the results I was hoping for. Just my opinion from using it over the past 6 months.

November 23rd, 2009, 07:50 AM	#14
Olof Ekbergh Sponsor: Westside AV Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA Posts: 1,365	Are you projecting SD? It seems strange that this lens would not be good enough for SD. I would do a few tests with charts. You may have a bad lens. Have you talked with your dealer? For this type of live screen SD. I would rather be using a DSR500/300 type of camera. It is a lot heavier so it will be much steadier and you could archive the tapes easily. You can easily get these cams used and the standard lenses are much longer, plus the lenses are interchangeable.

November 23rd, 2009, 12:15 PM	#15
Ben Hogan Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Grapevine Texas Posts: 27	What's on the screen is SD. I'm going out the HD/SDI to a switcher. I send the HD signal, I want to record in HD. The signal on the screens looks fine in SD. That's not my concern. The concern is what's being recorded. No haven't talked to the dealer, bought this through B&H. Could be a bad lens, as I'm not happy with the results. I wouldn't invest in a SD camera, these seminars are not my only business and in a perfect world I'd buy one of the new 350s coming out using SxS but economics aren't in my favor at the moment. I'm through with tape. I haven't used tape in over a year. I don't hate tape but I can work a lot faster without it. Shoot, Ingest, Edit...simple. My office is shrinking without the need for decks and storage for tapes. A few harddrives for multiple copies(back-ups) of work and it's all good. First flat screen monitors now tapeless cameras, I'll be able to work out of closet before too long, haha, kidding, I keep my clients that don't pay on time in there...