Which 35mm adapter would you buy? [Archive] - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking

tigeba

02-15-2006, 04:48 PM

I am on the pre-order list for the G35 so that is my first choice. I think the footage from the beta units beats anything I have seen from any of the other adapters. My second choice would be the Redrock.

All the letus footage I have seen is uniformly soft and grainy. I'm pretty sure for $500 I could pull this off myself.

The SG35 seems like a knockoff of the M2 design. On some of the clips it looks ok, but still seems to suffer softness, vingetting and wierdness (pumping? strobing? not sure the right word) that results from the spinning GG. Look at the Z1 nighttime clip on the SG35 site and you can see all three of these in action.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 07:23 PM

i'm going G35 because it looks incredible!! have you seen the monterey video?

that sold me. I'm looking to do some music videos here soon and the G35 will greatly improve my images. (it really adds to that filmic look)

Norm Sanders

02-15-2006, 07:48 PM

Not to make things tougher for you Yankee, but have you looked at the Go35 or My35, which have been discussed heavily in the DIY forum, and are even lower priced?

If you can wait, waltind and I will be performing our shoot out on Feb. 25th, with side by side comparisons on multiple units (SG35, Letus35, My35, etc.) on three DVX100a's at the same time. Res charts, live model with dramatic lighting, etc. Jarred's going to post the article, after I've been able to write it up & compile all the results, on DVXuser. Should be informative & beneficial to all, I hope.

It'll also be a chance to see Dakotapod's matte box and Indie Focus' geared follow focus in action with the adapters.

J.R. Hudson

02-15-2006, 07:51 PM

Anyone have the official links to these ?

Blaine

02-15-2006, 07:54 PM

I thought Edweirdo got some stunning results with his:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=45972
Only problem, it's a one off.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 08:00 PM

www.cinemek.com - G35
www.redrock.com - M2

not sure about the other ones

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 08:22 PM

The Letus is www.letus35.com
The SG35 is http://homepage.ntlworld.com/wayne.kinney/sg35.htm

I think I will wait for your tests. I have really given myself a headache with all these models out there and I just cannot figure out which one is worth the purchase. I have looked at the footage of a lot of units and they really look good, a little soft on some, but in general nice DOF. The problem for me is just which one to buy...

Its funny because I'm always bitching that with the corporate state sooner or later we're only going to have one choice, Walmart. This is the one time where I wish there was just one choice...

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 08:25 PM

freaking wal mart.
i hate that place.

Norm Sanders

02-15-2006, 08:30 PM

Yes, but the question is: If Walmart offered all your audio/visual gear at a reduced price over anyone else, would you shop there anyway?

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 08:34 PM

As much as I hate Walmart and try never to shop there (I did buy a new shower curtain liner there this weekend) I am starting to go insane looking at all these 35mm adapters. There are literally a score of options between the DIY projects (I just checked out Weirdos and that's impressive) and the commercial ones. It is a little much to take in at once and as much as I like choice, I hate having to figure out which is going to provide the best results, the least wear on the camera (the Letus scares me), and the most bang for the least buck.

I have a hard time dropping $1500 on a 35mm adapter, but if I need to... well.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 08:48 PM

if I were you...just wait.
you're so undecided right now, it might be less stressful to just wait for others to give you the answers you want.

I'm sure you have projects coming up that you'd love to use an adaptor for, as do I.
For now i'm just proceeding as normal, I'm still learning as I go, so hopefully when I get my G35 I'll be that much better.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 08:51 PM

Yes, but the question is: If Walmart offered all your audio/visual gear at a reduced price over anyone else, would you shop there anyway?

no, i'm an avid non-shopper of walmart.

I've seen them deal serious blows to my home town...we've been trying to recover since the 80's. The downtown mom and pop stores are finally starting to gain some ground and the storefronts are filling up...but I believe it's at the cost of seeing other towns die.

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 08:52 PM

I actually completely agree and with Norm's post I'm just going to wait and see what's up with that unit. As of right now there are just too many options. Then again, I haven't checked Walmart.com yet.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 08:59 PM

boy, i can hardly wait to finally get mine (G35). I'm #1 in line and I'll definitely post my own reviews on it. I'm not as super-experienced with photo/video gear as most of the guys on here...but we'll see what happens.

My big dilemma is finding lenses. have you got that part figured out??

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 09:02 PM

Ebay. If you got the canon mount then there are tons of Canon FD 1.4 50mm's available on ebay for around $20-$50.

I don't know anything about the G35 (I will in the next 20 min) so I don't know if there is a better lens to use.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 09:05 PM

I plan on getting the canon and nikon mounts.

Right now the only lens I own is a Sigma 1.8 20mm

I kind of want to see how the new zeiss lenses come along (nikon mount).

I have a couple friends who are photographers and they are Canon guys. So maybe I can just borrow some of their lenses.

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 09:07 PM

I just read about the G35, and the problem is, well, there is footage of it in use, but they don't have a lot of pictures of the unit. It looks like a great device though, but I don't know anything else about it

Norm Sanders

02-15-2006, 09:14 PM

Geez, Canon FD 1.4 50mm's for $20-50? I FINALLY won mine for $68 + $10 shipping. Mint condition (nearly) and it came with the hood/shade, but they've otherwise been fairly slim pickings from what I could tell at the time. Nikon's go for even a little more, it seems (Letus35 has a switchable Canon FD / Nikon AI mount). I've even got a 100-300 Canon zoom lens I'm looking forward to testing out, but it's a 5.6 so it'll only be useful for bright outdoor shots. I've got a beach wedding in May that I'll hopefully have some use out of it with.

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 09:16 PM

I've won two 1.4 FD mounts on Ebay (in prep of buying one of these badboys). One I paid $21 and it's nice and clean, the other I paid $36. I guess I did pretty well.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 09:19 PM

everyone in the G35 community is excited but also very cautious right now.

they recently announced that the focusing screen on the production models is not static, but a vibrating one. Everyone's kinda like, WTF?

So now we're waiting on more test shots with the production models. I thought the preproduction models were awesome, so hopefully the updated production models kick ass. So far the owner, Jonathan, has been really careful about his business and he seems to believe in releasing the best possible product. I don't think he's out to screw anybody, and I believe him when he says that the production model will be much better than the preproduction units.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 09:22 PM

these look sexy.

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/GraphikTitelIntern/01/$File/01.jpg

i'll see if i can find some more pics of the G35 for ya.

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 09:25 PM

They look nice, but so does... well other stuff in pictures. I have no witty comment.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-15-2006, 09:28 PM

not sure if you saw this one

http://cinemekserve.temp.powweb.com/demos/demos/IMAGES/DVXsmall.jpg

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 09:31 PM

That looks nice. I'm becoming more curious about this unit now, but I stil think I'm going to take the advice of this thread and just wait until I see Norm's test footage.

tigeba

02-15-2006, 10:00 PM

One nice thing about the G35, at least if you own a DVX/HVX is the bayonet mount. Should be really solid, shouldn't need rails unless you start using really heavy lenses.

As far as Canon -vs- Nikon goes, I will admit that I shoot Canon, and I have a lot of nice Canon glass, but for manual lenses, I think Nikon is probably the way to go. I'm going to order an EOS and F mount, but I already picked up a Nikon 50 1.4 and a 24 2.8, and they were both fairly cheap.

I'm not entirely sure how the EOS or FD mounts will handle the little lever that has to be moved to make the aperture work on FD lenses. Anyway I wanted to use these manual lenses on my Canon EOS bodies, and as it turns out Nikon manual lenses seem to work better than most FD lenses work on EOS bodies. Who knew.

Those Zeiss lenses look cool, but I really think it would be a huge waste of bucks to get them to use on a 35mm adapter on a DVX or HVX. I would imagine that 85 1.4 is around $1500.

Get yourself a 50mm 1.4, a 24mm 2.8 and maybe a 85mm 1.8 and that will be a really nice set of primes. I will definately be posting footage with my full assortment of lenses if they ever ship the g35. I can't wait to see what the 300 f4 L can do attached to my DVX. I expect it will be like carrying a shoulder mount rocket.

Slimothy

02-15-2006, 10:02 PM

I'm in your exact shoes Yankee. So many choices.

Jeremy Ordan

02-15-2006, 10:17 PM

I'm in your exact shoes Yankee. So many choices.

Let's go to Walmart together and figure it out.

Steve Strickland

02-15-2006, 10:46 PM

I'm in line for the G35 as well, but the longer they take to getting it out, the more I start thinking about other options. The sudden last minute total redesign has me a little skeptical. Bkindy's adapter looks real promising. It's static and the pro version is gonna be about $550. Hmm, $1300 for a G35, or $550 for a nice DIY style adapter. The money saved could buy me new jib. Dammit, the equipment lust will never end!

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-16-2006, 12:17 AM

well i'll be your guys' guinea pig soon enough.

alpha54

02-16-2006, 01:04 AM

I'm really looking forwards to a comparison test as well; there's too many choices!

rawfa

02-21-2006, 06:00 AM

All I can say is that I had some important projects some time ago and I bought the letus35 instead of waiting for the G35. The image was way too soft and it totaly killed the FX1 HD footage...not to mention distortion around the edges. I heard that the new version (letus35A) is suposed to be much better, but I decided to put my money on a sure bet...and for me it's the G35. Their footage is absolutely amazing! I visit redrocks' site often and their footage REALLY improoved in the last year and a half. They also allow you to buy 2 different types of glasses for different types fo lighting, which is really amazing. The real problem for me is that I absolutely need to be able to shoot hand held. But if that is not a problem for, Redrock is kicking ass right now.

CineAlta

02-22-2006, 01:18 AM

I would buy one of these two:

http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-mini35-converter.php

http://www.dandiaconu.com/newweb/mpic.htm

slinks

02-22-2006, 07:06 AM

I wouldn't

rook

02-22-2006, 09:36 AM

The g35 looks great but nothing seems to be as crisp, grainless and compact as dan's MPIC.

Very expensive though. But if you have the cash the footage speaks for it's self.

-rook

Jeremy Ordan

02-22-2006, 12:09 PM

While I appreciate everyone's feedback so far in this thread, it has simply just confused me more than I already was. In general what I am finding confusing is the fact that you have all these options available, from the Letus, the G35, the SG35, the Micro, and there is no sure fire answer to what is the ideal product. The Letus is the least expensive but people say that the image is way too soft, even with the Letus 35a. The SG35 takes 6-8 weeks to receive, but comes with a rail system, but it is almost an unproven commodity, although the footage looks relatively sharp. Including shipping the SG35 seems to be almost as expensive as the Letus 35 flip. Then there is the redrockmikro which looks great, the footage looks sharp, but people have said that the system in general is a pain in the ass to get set up properly (open the unit, adjust, close the unit, adjust, rinse, repeat). Then there is this G35, where the footage looks good, but who knows what the deal with this product is really going to be.

On top of that we get EDWeirdo's DIY which looks great, the footage is nice, but I wonder what the weight will do to the mount as well as how realistic it is to recreate this setup.

I know we have a shoot out coming, and I'm hoping that it will include some rez charts along with some low light tests, but in general I am finding this entire situation to be migraine inducing.

Norm Sanders

02-22-2006, 12:17 PM

Shoot-out is this Saturday, but unfortunately the only ones participating are the SG35 (spinning GG) and Letus35a/Flip (vibrating GG).

None of the static GG guys could commit to having commercially viable units available for purchase by the time the article's published; a requirement to participate for two reasons: 1.) Don't want to have potential design changes after the testing, which would in effect make the testing moot as the member wouldn't be getting the same unit that was tested. 2.) Don't want to have members excited about something that could possibly be months or even further down the road before it's actually available.

Since the G35 (not ready yet anyway) and Redrock's M2 are both over $1K, we're simply focusing on the products that are ready RIGHT now, as well as are well below the $1K mark. We're also hoping to feature use of the geared Indie Focus, for our rack focusing, as well as Dakotapod's low cost mattebox in use with the 35 adapters.

We'll have the res. charts posted, in addition the low light testing, ext. day shots, models/subjects under dramatic lighting, etc.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-22-2006, 12:20 PM

I've been shooting without a 35 adaptor (until my G35 is ready)...it's not a must have.
you can still get nice DOF if you pull some tricks.

...and it will save your brain from future migraines.

Thomas J. O'Hara

02-22-2006, 12:21 PM

although, I AM getting sick of my hexagonal bokeh.

TimurCivan

02-22-2006, 03:01 PM

First whats bokeh?

second, check this out. As a testiment for the sg35. For some reason i have had alot attraction to this adapter. i just love the way it renders color.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=46013

this is what this machine can produce in capable hands.

slinks

02-22-2006, 03:58 PM

yea I think not only does dan's footage look great but the design is pretty sexy but damn...I can get another dvx with that :(. The g35 was my fist pick at 1st when I 1st saw some of those demos for it but the increased price and the wait has got me looking for an alternative. Especially since the go35 so far seems somewhat promising...hopefully. I'm just waiting for the footage.

mrpunch

02-23-2006, 09:13 AM

Are most people using 50mm lenses with their adapters? Do the adapters do anything that is changing the representitive focal length? I remember my old Nikon 50mm lense attached to my EM body was basically the same shot as the naked eye. Is the same true when using an adapter? i.e. Would you look for an 80mm or 135mm lens to use for CU?

Norm Sanders

02-23-2006, 09:52 AM

50mm is just a VERY common lens that's still quite economical to get at a fast, 1.4 Apeture (HIGHLY desired when working with adapters, as you're already getting some degree of light loss with the adapter) . The further you go in either direction (wider to a 28mm for example, or zoom with 135mm, etc.).

I've got a 100-300mm zoom lens that I still haven't tested out, but it's already at 5.6, so it'll be bright sunny days that I'll have to use it ... or staring straight into a 1K light, as the original Letus35 already has 1+ stops of light loss.

mrpunch

02-23-2006, 10:00 AM

I know that with my Nikon D70 digital camera, that a 50mm lens actually gives the visual image that a 75mm lens would on an old 35mm camera. This is due to the way the digital imaging occurs. The ratio is 1.5x

That's kind of what I was wondering when using an adapter. Does a 50mm lens give you a viewpoint similar to the naked eye as in an old 35mm camera, or is it more like a telephoto lens as when used on a digital camera.

TimurCivan

02-23-2006, 01:31 PM

The digital camera probably has a CMos or CCD thats smaller, thanthe 35mm frame. hence teh multiplying. Bt in theory, the 35mm adpters should give you the same field of view as the lens naturally creates, cause the DVX optics are reading a full frame projected image off the GG.

Norm Sanders

02-23-2006, 01:54 PM

Also depends on how far you have to zoom in so you don't have the edges of the GG/glue showing, etc. One note, never trust your LCD to tell you if you're zoomed in enough ... check it on your NLE, monitor (DVRack works really well for this), etc. ... then for me, I take Gaffer tape and wrap that zoom ring down so it won't budge, and obviously turn the servo off (put it in manual), so I won't have the chance of accidentally stripping the servo out.

If you used black gaffer tape, and do it wisely, it's not too noticeable ... otherwise, I'm more concerned about the end picture/results than if someone sees tape on my DVX.

Jeremy Ordan

02-23-2006, 02:28 PM

mrpunch

02-23-2006, 02:43 PM

Yep - I'm looking forward to it as well - and I'm also already in line for an SG35. #16 - placed order last week!

Norm Sanders

02-23-2006, 04:21 PM

There's some new information on the SG35 that I don't know if you guys are aware of yet or not ... I'll be sharing it in the article, based on what Wayne's given me.

EVERYTHING will be NON-CC'd. No one's going to care about how pretty we can CC something, so why bother. Eh, just for kicks I MAY punch a few things up, but I'll have the raw stuff as well, if I do.

Yankee, the Micro/M2 just was simply not an option. 1.) It goes against our original vision of this which was a shoot out of SUB $1K adapters ... more inline with the DIY community. 2.) Redrock wants to be compared agains the more expensive ones (i.e. MPIC, Mini35, Movie Box, etc.).

If people like what we've done with the shoot out as far as unbiased information, as well as extremely informative, then perhaps we'll be able to do others with some of the more expensive units ... which by then hopefully the G35 would be available as well.

Gordon JL

02-23-2006, 09:08 PM

A DOF adapter would make almost anything look filmic. Has anyone seen the footage of the HC1 + Letus35? I'm starting to wonder why I didn't just purchase the HC1 or A1U over the DVX -- it's F#$*@ing HD!

Norm Sanders

02-23-2006, 10:20 PM

So have you got a monster computer that can handle the HD? I've got a fairly robust system, but not enough to really handle HD ... so until it's upgrade, HD's kind of moot ... besides, unless you're blowing up for film, there's still not that much consumer demand to support it (i.e. HD DVD players, etc.).

TimurCivan

02-25-2006, 08:19 AM

Envision, I wish you were going to be testing the micro in this test because I, like other members here, could rationalize spending $1000 if we were going to get the results we are looking for. Also, as others have said, the 50mm is popular because of price and availability. I am really excited to see your results. The SG35 is still in the running for me, but I hope that you show some raw footage with no colorcorrection or cropping so we can see how it really looks. Can't wait to see the tests.

Just wait for the comparison. because honestly you cant judge these things by small 320 x 240 .mov and .WMVs....

i have seen DV footage of the SG35, ( wayne was supplying a 10 secong DV clip for a while) and it looks great. Thats why i bought one.

but honestly, the rezolutıon in the adpter isnt everything. when they compare, you gotta look for things like, chroma abbrasion, VIgnetting, light loss, size weight, etc. theres more factors than just pure rez, just like any camera. If rez was all that mattered we,d all be shooting XL2s... but were not.

brandon jameson

02-26-2006, 01:21 PM

Hey all!

Just wanted to take a second to comment on this 35mm adapter thread with a repost FYI.

I ordered the IFocus adapter created by DVX user twocik23 for my DVX100A, as we already have the Letus Flip and have had some buddies bring over Redrock and (Finally) the G35......

Here's what i find-

Each adapter gives it own "look", if you’re searching for a magical device that provides all the attributes of film on the DVX100's 1/3" chips and the restrictions of the mini DV format , by simply attaching a bit of glass.... FORGET IT!!!!

The truth is, 35mm adapters are a unique way for indie filmmakers to get the type of depth of field seen only with cinema prime lenses. And the results have stepped up the game of what we can expect from images captured by fixed-lens video cameras.

Yes, some adapters add grain, noticable softness of focus, or create unique changes in highlights...but so do filters and film emulsions.

If you look at these adapters as a tool to add a "unique look" to your images, instead of a way to mimic "FILM", then the comparisons with emulsion-based media that seem to endlessly appear on boards like this, might simply disappear.

After comparing the adapters, my group of DP friends and folks i work with, found twocik23s adapter to be the easiest to use.clean and upgrade, able to focus clearly and create images that have a uniquely beautiful look and feel.

The spinning/vibrating adapters that model themselves on the P+S 35 adapter (+ $10.000), have their own set of limitations not restricted to batteries,light loss and a noticeable flicker or "hot spots" in highlights.

The current "flip" adapter, uses mirrors and other optics to create video that is recorded to tape the way it is viewed ,making shooting work-arounds and post production easier, however the loss of light and sharp focus inherent to the adapter, can result in images that are substandard.

The static adapters depend on "trade secret" ground glass, focus screens or wax based elements to provide their results.... the object here is to find an adapter that uses the best solution to the "grain/focus problem", and can be cleaned of dust.

We found the G35, while beautiful to look at, might be difficult for an end-user to resolve problems like degradation and dust occurring inside their sealed unit.

The IfOCUS adapter created by twocik23 is easy to clean and maintain, and its "grain pattern" is visually very subtle to virtually invisible depending on light situation.

In conclusion:

These adapters are variations of first generation solutions to a very specific problem.
The adapter you choose should provide you with the look YOU find aesthetically pleasing, (think of it like selecting a sound system...one man's PERFECT speaker is another man's least favorite.)

Jeremy Ordan

03-01-2006, 10:41 AM

Any news on when the results from the shootout will be posted?

CalMatt

03-02-2006, 03:00 AM

Hey guys... saw this post while searching on google, and noticed mention of the a1u w/ 35mm adapter. Just thought I'd post my samples I've done with my setup here. As good as it looks, I'm actually far from happy with my results... I've seen better. The thing I'm stuck on right now is the difference in latitude my a1u has compared to some equally priced 3ccd camcorders. Maybe I don't know the correct settings, but I'd really like to see my camera have my latitude/range, instead of exposing a foreground correctly, but having the background completely blown out.

Clip 1 (http://download.filefront.com/4757902;7151e9aa8a40aad94798a14040251a27e8e00eeefb e93976bf4c67ed30063e941558a8568d0b36d3)

Clip 2 (http://download.filefront.com/4793792;7151e9aa8a40aad94798a14040251a27e8e00eeefb e93976bf4c67ed30063e941558a8568d0b36d3)

LoopFilms

03-02-2006, 05:46 AM

Wasn't the G35 suppose to be taking orders in January? I think the G35 is a bit overrated, I mean the price seems to bump up every now and then, and they always push the date back on the release. I like the redrock, because its around $300-400.00 cheaper and its complete with everything.

PaPa

03-02-2006, 09:31 AM

Norm Sanders

03-02-2006, 09:57 AM

Waltind and I completed the testing this past weekend for the SG35 and Letus35Flip. The results were interesting, to say the least, and we hope to have the article up & published with Jarred on here in the next 1 - 1 1/2 weeks as we go through all the footage & do the side-by-sides, stills, etc.

TimurCivan

03-02-2006, 04:26 PM

im seriously concidering the redrock one as well, seems to have the nicest footage, except they dont havea flip version of it yet do they? hrmph.

and then there is the question of which lens to purchase with it with the right mounts and son on. man, need more time and information. Seems to me it might be best to give this product tiem to evolve.

GEt Nıkon mounts and lenses. They have smoother apeture settıngs. Canon FD lenses While AWESOME.... have this weird issue with apeture where you have to activate a switch to make the ıris stop down ( great for taking pictures cause then the image through the view finder is bright, press the shutter and it snaps down to F5.6 for example) and none of the mounts activate this switch. you need rubber bands or a piece of wire to pull the switch. ( and who wants wire near their lens?) some, and i stress SOME of the lenses have an auto lock, that you can push by hand that activated this switch, if you can find thoes youre lucky not all models carried it.

i have Canon FD lenses, so i have to cope, but if youre gonna staart a collection from scracth, go with Nikon.

Start with:
50 or 55 mm F1.2/F1.4 prime. 1.2 are harder to come by but give you an extra stop.

28mm medium wide. F2.0 is ususally easy to find and cheap used. anything brighter than that gets expensive. An F 1.4 28mm can run about 100$ but an F2.0 20$ on Ebay

an 80-200 Zoom lense just for the sake of having a medium and long telephoto in one. cheap ones are in the 50$-100$ range. They usually run about
F 3.5 some cheaper lenses can have F5.6 at full open.

NOW: if youre on a budget, you can combine a couple lenses with a 30-100~MM Zoom. they usually are about F2.8 - F3.5 at widest, which BTW will give you shallow DOF. ( the DOF on my 50mm 1.4 lense at wide is about 1 or 2 inches. Even at 6 or 7 feet away youre choosing between the ears and eyes being in focus, trust me F 2.8 will be your friend.... Somehow i still want that 55mm F1.2.... Drool) Also these lenses tend to come with some macro capability.

A super wide like a 16mm or a 20mm is a nice additıon but not neccesary. they also have alot of distortion, and if they don,t have distortion... they cost ALOT.
A 16mm F1.4 that i have my eye on is about 450$.

hope this helps. i am only 22, but ive been shooting photos with my Dads CAnon AE-1P since i was 10. lucky for me my dad was a photo nut and i have 5 lenses. with 2 more on the way.

Norm Sanders

03-02-2006, 04:32 PM

If I recall, the FD mount on the Letus DOES activate that switch you're talking about on the Canon lenses, because their were a couple of times we noticed the iris stopped down when someone accidentally moved it, and we needed to open it back up to the 1.4/wide.

TimurCivan

03-03-2006, 08:10 AM

REALLY?! thats awesome

maybe i should find out what mount they use and Retofit my SG35. (when i get it)

Norm Sanders

03-03-2006, 12:41 PM

The Letus35 uses a custom machined metal mount that's Canon FD on one end, and Nikon AI on the other (this is an upgrade option, but worth it IMO).

PaPa

03-03-2006, 01:27 PM

GEt Nıkon mounts and lenses. They have smoother apeture settıngs. Canon FD lenses While AWESOME.... have this weird issue with apeture where you have to activate a switch to make the ıris stop down ( great for taking pictures cause then the image through the view finder is bright, press the shutter and it snaps down to F5.6 for example) and none of the mounts activate this switch. you need rubber bands or a piece of wire to pull the switch. ( and who wants wire near their lens?) some, and i stress SOME of the lenses have an auto lock, that you can push by hand that activated this switch, if you can find thoes youre lucky not all models carried it.

i have Canon FD lenses, so i have to cope, but if youre gonna staart a collection from scracth, go with Nikon.

Start with:
50 or 55 mm F1.2/F1.4 prime. 1.2 are harder to come by but give you an extra stop.

28mm medium wide. F2.0 is ususally easy to find and cheap used. anything brighter than that gets expensive. An F 1.4 28mm can run about 100$ but an F2.0 20$ on Ebay

an 80-200 Zoom lense just for the sake of having a medium and long telephoto in one. cheap ones are in the 50$-100$ range. They usually run about
F 3.5 some cheaper lenses can have F5.6 at full open.

NOW: if youre on a budget, you can combine a couple lenses with a 30-100~MM Zoom. they usually are about F2.8 - F3.5 at widest, which BTW will give you shallow DOF. ( the DOF on my 50mm 1.4 lense at wide is about 1 or 2 inches. Even at 6 or 7 feet away youre choosing between the ears and eyes being in focus, trust me F 2.8 will be your friend.... Somehow i still want that 55mm F1.2.... Drool) Also these lenses tend to come with some macro capability.

A super wide like a 16mm or a 20mm is a nice additıon but not neccesary. they also have alot of distortion, and if they don,t have distortion... they cost ALOT.
A 16mm F1.4 that i have my eye on is about 450$.

hope this helps. i am only 22, but ive been shooting photos with my Dads CAnon AE-1P since i was 10. lucky for me my dad was a photo nut and i have 5 lenses. with 2 more on the way.

Thats awsome advice man.

Lets keep this up for a minute or two cause this could be great information :)

Now, the other concern of mine was because there are so many companies that produce them, and the fact that some have flip, while others don't, that there are cleaning issues, issues here and there. Would it not be better to wait a couple of months and maximum a year, actually god no not a year, but to wait and see what comes out of this evolution of adapters?

Also, which type of lens attachment would alow longer depths of field? Many of the videos i see today have far too short a depth of field and feels more like a music video or some other artistic genre of film. But modern day film use a variety, some really short, but some pretty long too. What 'mm' lens does what?

I am eagerly awaiting purchasing one because i have seen footage with these adapters, especially the redrock one. However with that one, the image is not flipped, correct? It is horizontally and vertically flipped so all backwards when capturing? This can't be too convienient for shooters.

Keep comments coming man, i would love to finish my queries about these adapters once and for all.

TimurCivan

03-04-2006, 07:01 AM

Thats awsome advice man.

Lets keep this up for a minute or two cause this could be great information :)

Now, the other concern of mine was because there are so many companies that produce them, and the fact that some have flip, while others don't, that there are cleaning issues, issues here and there. Would it not be better to wait a couple of months and maximum a year, actually god no not a year, but to wait and see what comes out of this evolution of adapters?

Also, which type of lens attachment would alow longer depths of field? Many of the videos i see today have far too short a depth of field and feels more like a music video or some other artistic genre of film. But modern day film use a variety, some really short, but some pretty long too. What 'mm' lens does what?

I am eagerly awaiting purchasing one because i have seen footage with these adapters, especially the redrock one. However with that one, the image is not flipped, correct? It is horizontally and vertically flipped so all backwards when capturing? This can't be too convienient for shooters.

Keep comments coming man, i would love to finish my queries about these adapters once and for all.

WEll the wider lenses tend to be Deeper DOF. like the 16mm 28mm up till about 38mm. then they reach a more neutral looking image, this is where the DOF tends to get shallower, and more noticable. And of course long lenses, like 85mm + are longer lenses, and will give you an even shallower. now theres lots of factors. Look at the Cinematorgraphy thread and read Barry greens DOF tutorial.

that will give you lots of info.

AS for the flip, my opionion is , the less glass the light had to go through thebeetter. it leadsto more oppertunities for distorion, rez loss,and chroma abbrasion.

just flip the imagei n post, and get a magnet for the LCD screen, or get a External LCDscreen.

i still say wait before you buy, at least until the Comparison comes out. i bought mine just cause i really want the capability now.

PaPa

03-04-2006, 10:30 AM

so is it wise to say let it evolve a bit? WAit till everyones got their flips and shiznick?

Norm Sanders

03-04-2006, 11:24 AM

I think, like anything, there will ALWAYS be improvements & upgrades ... so it's not as if there's a certain date you can wait for when all the manufacturers have hit their apex and will stop improving.

Yes, the more zoom the shallower DOF, and typically the much greater cost as well, if you want to keep it a fast lens (i.e. 1.4 apeture).

Personally, I don't believe that flipping the image via prism/mirrors in the unit would cause any MORE resolution loss than you'll get when having to flip the image in post. ANY time you rework your image in post by flipping, adding CC, FX, etc. there is potential for loss in varying degrees.

TimurCivan

03-05-2006, 08:27 AM

Personally, I don't believe that flipping the image via prism/mirrors in the unit would cause any MORE resolution loss than you'll get when having to flip the image in post. ANY time you rework your image in post by flipping, adding CC, FX, etc. there is potential for loss in varying degrees.

There had better be some nice optics in that flipping mechanism cause turning an image upside down is delicate. if the mirrors or diopeters are just a tiny fraction off, the whole thing goes to Crap. then theres additional loss of light.

I cant understand why a person woudl spend money to furhter degrade the image. (no offense to anyone who boughta LEtus flip) But flipping the digital image in post is FAR less degrading ot the image then forcing pre focused light through a series of mirrios and such.

Bite the bullet and get an exernal LCD monitor.