Ok, let me get this straight (newb questions about 35mm adapters)

[Asthuriel]

Yes, shallow focus is nice. I'm not sure you absolutely need it to do an interesting, entretaining film, but yes, it's a nice tool. This said, I've been reading about 35mm adapters, and this is what I have noticed.

* A 35mm adapter is nothing but a macro lens in front of the lens of your camera, and a focusing screen a little ahead. The rest are just a bunch of tubes and step up rings so everything gets in the right place. Right?

* Oh, the focusing screen should vibrate. Because otherwise you would notice minimum imperfections in the recording. Right?

* The idea is to get a 35mm lens and put it in front of the focusing screen so it projects the image in the screen, and then the camera records this projected image. Right?

* Oddly, most people don't use 35mm lenses per se, but 50mm 1.8f lenses (not sure why, tho). Oh, and you are not supposed to use SLR lenses, but Canon FDs or Nikon Fs. Right?

* Once you attach this gargantuan monster in front of your camera, aperturte and focus should be fixed. Then you control focus and aperture with the 35mm lens. Right?

* Forget about zooming. You can't. You zoom till the focusing screen projection takes the whole screen and then that's about it. Right?

Well that's it. Is there something else I need to know? Am I wrong with my research? :hv20-smilie01:

[Worley]

Yes, shallow focus is nice. I'm not sure you absolutely need it to do an interesting, entretaining film, but yes, it's a nice tool. This said, I've been reading about 35mm adapters, and this is what I have noticed.

An interesting films comes from a good story. If there is no story, there is no good film. Good camera work helps too. But without a story, nada.



* A 35mm adapter is nothing but a macro lens in front of the lens of your camera, and a focusing screen a little ahead. The rest are just a bunch of tubes and step up rings so everything gets in the right place. Right?

Wrong. You can use any 35mm SLR lens (preferably manual). This is attached to MACRO EXTENSION TUBES at one end. The other end connect to the camera. Between camera and lens, in the extension tubes, is a focussing screen.


* Oh, the focusing screen should vibrate. Because otherwise you would notice minimum imperfections in the recording. Right?

You would possibly notice the grain of the focussing screen and any imperfections on that screen.


* The idea is to get a 35mm lens and put it in front of the focusing screen so it projects the image in the screen, and then the camera records this projected image. Right?

Yes.


* Oddly, most people don't use 35mm lenses per se, but 50mm 1.8f lenses (not sure why, tho). Oh, and you are not supposed to use SLR lenses, but Canon FDs or Nikon Fs. Right?

Terminology is confusing here. The lenses ARE 35mm in the sense that they are designed for 35mm cameras (ie, cameras that take 35mm film.

The 50mm lens part refers to some quality of the lens itself. I'm not a photographer, so it's still not entirely clear to me, but that number corresponds to the magnification offered by the lens. That is, whether it is a wide angle or telephoto. 50mm is a good compromise between telephoto and wide angle.

Canon and Nikon both make SLR lens. They are favoured because of their high quality.


* Once you attach this gargantuan monster in front of your camera, aperturte and focus should be fixed. Then you control focus and aperture with the 35mm lens. Right?

Ideally.


* Forget about zooming. You can't. You zoom till the focusing screen projection takes the whole screen and then that's about it. Right?

With the right 35mm lens, you can zoom. But not using the camcorder. You have to use the 35mm lens.


Well that's it. Is there something else I need to know? Am I wrong with my research? :hv20-smilie01:

You're reasonably right. :hv20-smilie77:

[Asthuriel]

Thanks for taking the time to read my entire post, Worley. Your clarifications were pretty enlightening. :hv20-smilie77:

[mattias]

good answers. although...


Wrong. You can use any 35mm SLR lens
i think you misread. he said a macro lens in front of the camera and a screen in front of that, which is correct.

Then you control focus and aperture with the 35mm lens. Right?
not aperture. you typically leave that wide open and use the camera aperture to set exposure. feel free to experiment though.

The 50mm lens part refers to some quality of the lens itself. I'm not a photographer, so it's still not entirely clear to me
do you really have to be a "photographer" to know middle school optics? i'm sure focal length is in all basic science text books all over the world. it's the distance at which a lens focuses a beam. it does have to do with magnification though, so you seem to have grasped it without knowing. :-)

/matt

[Asthuriel]

Thanks Mattias.

And what about using lenses for SLRs? I read somewhere that those weren't appropiate enough. But I've been looking around and it seems all lenses nowadays are built for SLR cameras...

[mattias]

they often breathe as you focus and they don't have follow focus gears and much smaller rings with shorter distance which means less accuracy. that's pretty much it. i work with professional pl-mount lenses pretty much every week so i know the difference quite well.

/matt

[Rikki]

The 35mm relates to film size (or sensor size, ideally though only recently on full frame cameras). The 50mm you comonly see is the focal length and is generally a prime lens as these are the fastest (1.2 / 1.4 / 1.8). Slower lenses (larger f numbers) let less light through and therefor arent suited to sticking in front of the HV20 as it will knock the gain up.

On the focus screen being a vibrating one, I'm not so sure now. I've ordered up a static adapter from one of the guys on here after seeing demo footage from his creation and not noticing any dirt/dust/specs etc.

[mattias]

The 35mm relates to film size (or sensor size, ideally though only recently on full frame cameras).
it gets more complicated since 35mm motion picture film is only 24mm wide once you've removed the perfs, and standard (non super 35) aperture even narrower because of the soundtrack area. then there's still cameras, which we often compare with since we use lenses from them, and they run the film sideways which gives a 36x24mm image area. the canon hv20 should be able to focus to any of these areas on the ground glass with the right achromat. the super 35 area, 24mm wide, is probably a good choice for maximum resolution and still normal motion picture response to focal length.

:-)

/matt

[Fletch78]

And what about using lenses for SLRs? I read somewhere that those weren't appropiate enough. But I've been looking around and it seems all lenses nowadays are built for SLR cameras...

What you may have read is that DSLR (with the D for Digital) lenses are not a good choice because the image they project onto the ground glass is smaller and you most often can't control the aperture manually. Manually controllable SLR lenses (those for the "old" analog cameras) are what you'd be looking for.

[funkg]

hi I'm a noob and would like to add some more noobishness here if you don't mind.

This is about zoom. I'm assuming this is the way to get better zoom with this camera. Will I be able to get the same 20x zoom quality as with the canon xh-A1? What lense and specs would you recommend for some good zoom capability? thanks!

edit: Okay I think that was too noobish.. let me put my question more like this. Will adding this 35mm adapter pretty much equalize the hv20 with the a1 in terms of camera control as it relates to apeture, focus, shutter, and zoom?

[Norbert]

not aperture. you typically leave that wide open and use the camera aperture to set exposure. feel free to experiment though.Doesn't that look kind of fake? I mean, that would be like controlling exposure with ND filters on a real 35mm film camera. I always control exposure with the aperture on the 35mm lens. If you're trying to imitate real 35mm film you will notice that not all shots have that shallow depth of field because sometimes they have to stop down the lens, or they simply don't want the depth of field to be that shallow.

[wolferic]

edit: Okay I think that was too noobish.. let me put my question more like this. Will adding this 35mm adapter pretty much equalize the hv20 with the a1 in terms of camera control as it relates to apeture, focus, shutter, and zoom?

Ahem.

No.

[wolferic]

Doesn't that look kind of fake? I mean, that would be like controlling exposure with ND filters on a real 35mm film camera. I always control exposure with the aperture on the 35mm lens. If you're trying to imitate real 35mm film you will notice that not all shots have that shallow focus because sometimes they have to stop down the lens, or they simply don't want the depth of field to be that shallow.

Norbert -

The 35mm adapter is just a tool. It SUPPLEMENTS the other options on the HV20 (or any other camera, for that matter) it doesn't replace them. Want more DOF? Take the adapter off.

Would you accuse Canon of limiting us by including 24/25P or cine-mode? Again, these are options: used well, they can add another element to your work. Used badly or without much thought and they are just another effect.

And what's wrong with using ND filters to control the amount of light on a still camera – or a movie camera for that matter? I use them all the time to control the light getting into both. And so do DPs/cinematographers who have access to all kinds of lenses and film emultions to work with. Again, there is nothing 'fake' about using a tool well.

I really don't mean to sound harsh, but I've been seeing so many of these discussions degenerate into a kind of 'magic bullet' or use-this-don't-use-that kind of argument. I think this just muddies the waters for many. Not everyone will be able to try out a 35mm DOF adapter so it is legitimate that they ask questions about how they work and what effect they give. But really, like nearly any tool that gives subjective results, you have to try it out and see for yourself to decide whether the look works for you or looks 'fake.'

just my 2¢ :hv20-smilie55:

[Worley]

good answers. although...


i think you misread. he said a macro lens in front of the camera and a screen in front of that, which is correct.

I misunderstood; 'macro lens' is what threw me. Had it read 'achromat' I wold have understood. But reading it again, it is correct (although the achromat is not used by everyone. I don't.


not aperture. you typically leave that wide open and use the camera aperture to set exposure. feel free to experiment though. I prefer to use the 35mm lens adapter's aperture. It's easier than fiddling with the camera. Furthermore, I like to work with a shutter speed of 1/50 and lock the HV20's exposure. But this is a matter of personal preference.


do you really have to be a "photographer" to know middle school optics? i'm sure focal length is in all basic science text books all over the world. it's the distance at which a lens focuses a beam. it does have to do with magnification though, so you seem to have grasped it without knowing. :-)

I thought it may be the focal length, but being neither a photographer, physicist, not optician (or what ever a lens expert is called) I didn't want to embarrass myself.

Those many years ago when I was at school, we did study lenses, prisms and light. But that was a long time ago, and I've never had need to draw on what I learned, until now. So focal length, virtual images, etc, I have a rudimentary understanding of.

Mattias, I think you must be much younger than me. And as you don't have an British education, you'll not know how poor the British system is!

[Norbert]

Norbert -

The 35mm adapter is just a tool. It SUPPLEMENTS the other options on the HV20 (or any other camera, for that matter) it doesn't replace them. Want more DOF? Take the adapter off.

Would you accuse Canon of limiting us by including 24/25P or cine-mode? Again, these are options: used well, they can add another element to your work. Used badly or without much thought and they are just another effect.

And what's wrong with using ND filters to control the amount of light on a still camera – or a movie camera for that matter? I use them all the time to control the light getting into both. And so do DPs/cinematographers who have access to all kinds of lenses and film emultions to work with. Again, there is nothing 'fake' about using a tool well.

I really don't mean to sound harsh, but I've been seeing so many of these discussions degenerate into a kind of 'magic bullet' or use-this-don't-use-that kind of argument. I think this just muddies the waters for many. Not everyone will be able to try out a 35mm DOF adapter so it is legitimate that they ask questions about how they work and what effect they give. But really, like nearly any tool that gives subjective results, you have to try it out and see for yourself to decide whether the look works for you or looks 'fake.'

just my 2¢ :hv20-smilie55:It's all right, I'm not trying to tell anyone what to do. I just gave a tip to anyone who is using their adapter to emulate the "look" they see in the movies. Although I'm sure many DPs are using ND filters in situations where they want ultra shallow DOF in a very bright scene, I imagine using ND filters ALONE to control the exposure on a film camera all the time is not very common. I don't see many movies with ultra shallow DOF in every shot. This is just my response to what mattias said earlier about typically keeping the aperture wide open all the time. Like he also said, everyone are free to experiment to get the look they are after. I just gave my 2¢. :)

[mattias]

Doesn't that look kind of fake? I mean, that would be like controlling exposure with ND filters on a real 35mm film camera.
which is exactly what you typically do, as well as change film stocks and lighting to maintain the same aperture. when you see different dof's in a feature it's because they used different focal lengths, not different apertures.

or they simply don't want the depth of field to be that shallow.
which is eaxtly what i meant by feel free to experiment.

/matt

[mattias]

Mattias, I think you must be much younger than me. And as you don't have an British education, you'll not know how poor the British system is!
haha, yeah. sorry if that sounded harsh, i was just trying to point out the very fact that you were just afraid of being embarrassed and that you really knew the answer. :-)

i'm 34.

/matt

[Norbert]

which is exactly what you typically do, as well as change film stocks and lighting to maintain the same aperture. when you see different dof's in a feature it's because they used different focal lengths, not different apertures.Ah okay, I didn't know that. Is there a reason why they (who shoot features) want to maintain wide open aperture all the time? To me it sounds easier to expose with the aperture than with filters and different film stocks.

[wolferic]

Ah okay, I didn't know that. Is there a reason why they (who shoot features) want to maintain wide open aperture all the time? To me it just sounds so much easier to expose with the aperture than with filters and different film stocks.

I think what Mattias was saying was not specific to just wide-open lenses, but so that you could have the ability to use whatever aperture you want, and to keep the look consistent even with differing light conditions, lens changes etc. (at least that's worked for me).

[Erik Bien]

In fact, I'll go out on a limb and say that it's relatively rare for pros to shoot WFO, or for that matter the opposite extreme, stopped down to f/22, since lenses rarely look their best wide open or stopped all the way down.

[mattias]

absolutely. f/2.8-4 is probably the most common 35mm aperture in controlled lighting situations. in 16mm it's common to shoot wide open to get less dof.

/matt

[Worley]

@Mattias, you're NOT that much younger than me. Suddenly I feel younger.

I failed my physics exam, by the way, because I was very bored at the time and lacked motivation. The interesting parts I remember. Now that I am older, I can relate what I learned to what I see in the world around me, and all the subjects that bored me are once again interesting.

Still, mixing millimetres is confusing...

[funkg]

i think I read somewhere that the brain dumps info that it hasn't used after a certain amount of years. Anyways, is there any disadvantage to never taking the 35mm adapter off? will it screw auto focus with it on? Or do I have to take it off If I want to use auto focus? Again I am a noob..

[mattias]

the auto focus works fine with the adapter on, but since the ground glass is always at the exact same distance it doesn't have much to do.

(if you didn't catch my drift check the archives) ;-)

/matt

[mattias]

@Mattias, you're NOT that much younger than me. Suddenly I feel younger.
and you are? ;-)

/matt

[Worley]

and you are? ;-)

/matt

Older than my UK shoe size, but younger than my European shoe size:hv20-smilie81:

My age, sir, is a secret. But I am often mistaken for being in my mid/late 20s, which is nice.

[mattias]

between 10 and 44, oh my who would have guessed? :-)

/matt

[Asthuriel]

If your age is a secret, then you are over 30! ^^

Funny how this thread has been so commented. 35mm adapter is quite the keyword for you guys.