Different Lens Adapters for XL2

[Louis Maddalena]

I am sorry If I am being stupid here, but what is the difference between these 2 lens adapters and which one is better?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/beta/con...ughType=search

http://www.redrockmicro.com/micro35.html

Thank you for any help you can offer me.

[Djee Smit]

i'm not familiair with the first one but what the main difference is, is that the redrock not only mounts different lenses to your camera, it also projects the image of the lens on a 35mm sized plate, and that image is projected on the ccd's of your cam. The first adapter doesn't do that (i Believe).

By using the 35mm adapter instead of the other lens adapter you get the same dept of field as 35mm camera's, which an xl2 will never accomplish 'on its own'

Look in the P+S thread above, or in the alternative imaging methods thread for a lot of info on different 35mm adapter such as the red rock

This extra (or less, depends on how you look at it) dept of field will give you more a film look, which you are probably looking for..

[Paul Cuoco]

The EF adapter allows you to add 35mm Canon lenses to the camera, but magnifies the image due to the smaller imager in the camera.

See the bottom of the page here:
http://dvinfo.net/canonxl2/articles/article04.php#ceos

The RedRock Micro attaches to the front of the existing lens to allow you to get the depth of field of 35mm without the magnification, but flips the image upside down and needs to be corrected in post.

Another alternative would be to checkout the LetusXL http://www.letus35.com/page4.html

Which attaches directly to the XL1/1s/2/H1 like the EF adapter but also provides the depth of Field of the Redrock Micro, and internally corrects for the image flip.

There's plenty of info on these forums on all these adapters if you want to wade through it.

Paul