On Fri, 3 Dec 1999 05:37:34 GMT, jdubin@wwoorrlldd.ssttdd.ccoomm@world.std.com (Jeff Dubin) wrote:

>Any opinions on the 3x wide angle lens vs using EOS lenses for the same
>purpose? I'm not sure that it's even a possibility, with the
>magnification (?) that happens when using the EOS lenses on the XL-1.
>Ideally, I'd be able to buy a less expensive lens, still take great video
>with it as a wide-angle lens, and the pop the lens onto a 35mm body to do
>stills.

If you check out the focal-length range printed on the XL-1
lens, you will see that at its shortest (widest) end, the
FL in mm is far less (it is wider) than the shortest FL
lens made for the Canon 35mm still camera - even the
full-circle fisheye is longer in FL than the standard XL-1
zoom is at its short end. Wide-angle is a problem for video
cameras, alas (I LIKE WA's!;-), and more so for cameras with
lenses with large fronts (like the XL-1) since good
inexpensive WA converters will not fit it. (BTW, I have been
busy lately comparing various WA adapters [with various
spacings between the lens mounting threads and converters,
which affects performance] on my several Mini-DV camcorders.
Good matching of particular converters to particular lenses
is required for best results.)