Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 53

Thread: Nikon 35mm adapter which works! NO focussing screen.

  1. #1
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Lightbulb Nikon 35mm adapter which works! NO focussing screen.

    Hi all,
    Where do I start? I bought a static Twoneil adapter a few years back and a bunch of Nikon lenses. Was sadly disappointed with the results, particularly the vignetting (dark intrusion into corners of the frame) and the visible grain. Zooms lenses were right out. I must say that this is in no way Twoneils fault, it is what it is.

    A few nights ago, at a time which I confess I may not have been entirely sober, I performed a few experiments using bits of the other adapter plus one of the nice opteka 10x macro lens. I was trying to find a way to refocus the output of a nikon lens onto the small sensor in my hv20. After a few hours messing about, I was getting quite astonishing results. Ordered some more extension tubes online, which thankfully arrived saturday. Tinkered further over the weekend, made a few refinements giving me a fully working prototype.

    What I have now:

    1) Gives bright results. Ive been filming after 8pm in the evening (UK in April) and getting shots that look decently lit. Im using the CINE setting
    2) No vignetting (when set up properly). Seriously, no sign of those dark corners.
    3) No added grain, the light is focussed straight in and through to the sensor without any optical barrier.
    4) No chromatic aberations. Picture looks as good to me as via the HV20s own optics.
    5) I believe it is using as much of the lens as there is, no crop factor.
    6) If pointing at a flat surface, the centre and the outsides of the picture are on the same focal plane.
    7) Depth of field control by choice of lens, not by the iris (explanation below)
    8) Manual focussing in a proper way.
    9) Sadly, the image is still inverted - oh well, can't have it all I guess.


    Depth Of Field

    Because there is no focussing screen, it behaves differently to a normal 35mm adapter. What we seem to get is that a wide lens gives quite deep depth of field, whereas a telephoto lens gives quite shallow DOF . The iris on the nikon lens is kept fully open else you see the iris in the frame. A bit ike looking throught the gun barrel at the start of the Bond films.

    Ive tried these

    Nikkor 35mm 1:2.5 (AIS) -> plenty in focus.
    Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 (AIS) -> slightly shallower DOF
    Nikkor 100mm 1:2.8 (AIS) -> shallow DOF (maybe less than 15cm (6 inches) in focus at 1.5m (5 feet))

    Once the HV20 has been setup for these (Manual focus) I can swap between these lenses with no problems nor any further calibration required. If you knock the zoom or focus wheel on the camera it needs to be recalibrated again.

    I have a 28mm 1:2.8, but I have to add or remove some macro rings and re-zoom/focus to remove black corners. I'd rather stick with the setup that works for the others as I think its pretty much optimal.


    Calibration Procedure

    1) Set HV20 out of Auto mode and into 'P' mode. Set to manual focus
    2) Set focal length on Nikon lens to known distance (e.g 1m)
    3) Put something in from of it at that distance
    4) zoom out on HV20 till black outer ring shows.
    5) zoom in till black ring disappears from view, then a bit further to make sure.
    6) tweak focus on HV20 till object is in focus.

    I'm going to post some vids and screen captures over the next couple of days, so keep popping back. When some more bits arrive from china, I will attempt to reduce the number of taped joints.


    Manufacturing Instructions

    To make your own, you will need

    2 x nikon macro extension tubes (each containing a #1, #2 and #3 macro ring)
    2 x Opteka High definition 10x macro lens (the main body has 55mm threads, but usually ships with screw on adapters front and back)
    1 x reel of Electrical insulation tape (preferably black),
    1 x dustblower to remove dust from surface of lenses. After its been apart as much as mine has, the threads have ground many small particles loose.
    2 x 55mm to 57mm step up rings (probably listed online as for 55mm lens to accept 57mm filter)
    1 x 43mm to 55mm step up ring (listed online as for 43mm lens to accept a 55mm filter

    Total cost of buying the bits in the UK can be under 70 pounds. The main expense are the opteka lenses which are far cheaper in the States. No special skills required for assembly.

    Assembly: (+ indicates a screwed together join)

    43mm to 55mm step up ring
    +
    Opteka High definition 10x macro lens (facing away from the 43mm (HV20) end)
    +
    55mm to 57mm step up ring
    +
    #1 macro ring
    +
    #2 macro ring
    Tape join - we reverse direction so the #2 and #3 arent screwed together
    #3 macro ring
    +
    55mm to 57mm step up ring
    +
    Opteka High definition 10x macro lens (facing towards the 43mm (HV20) end)
    Tape join
    Nikon lens flange - with siver screw-in parts removed, leaving a well in the centre where the exposed thread of the opteka sits.
    tape join covering where direction reverses (exposed thread behind flange buts against exposed thread of #3 ring)
    #3 macro ring
    +
    Nikon lens Flange (ready to accept lens)



    Screw to your HV20, fit lens, calibrate and happy filming.

    The leftover bits:
    A #2 and #1 macro ring.
    The discarded siver ring from the nikon lens flange
    Both F mount parts from the macro extension tubes


    Troubleshooting

    The most critical measurement is distance from where the Nikon lens attaches to the back of the opteka. I believe just a few millimeters difference may prevent the outsides and the middle of the frame being in focus at the same time

    Conclusion

    I was seriously considering buying the Panasonic AF101 when it came out because I wanted to use my 35mm lenses and have DOF control. I'd even bid on one a few days before making this discovery, as the second hand price is getting quite acceptable. With a nanoflash recorder and prime lenses (all of which I already have), the resolution and picture from my HV20 is pretty comparable to that of the panasonic. How cool is that. Spend 60 quid, save a couple of grand!

  2. #2
    Director of Photography drapeama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maskinongé, Québec
    Posts
    10,499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by red5 View Post
    Because there is no focussing screen [...] I'm going to post some vids and screen captures over the next couple of days
    1) Let me be intrigued by that...I doubt about the whole process, but I'll wait for your results, even if I already have my own idea about it...
    2) Can't wait to watch them. I'm personally one of the few supporters left in the world of the DOF adapters.
    I DO IT BECAUSE I CAN. I CAN BECAUSE I WANT TO. I WANT TO BECAUSE YOU SAID I COULDN'T.

  3. #3
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Some pictures of the prototype

    adapter1.jpg

    Looking through from rear and front

    adapter2.jpg

    adapter3.jpg

  4. #4
    Legend Janke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drapeama View Post
    I doubt about the whole process
    It's legit - it is an "aerial image" system - something which I'm very familiar with - my animation stand has a 10" x 15" aerial image lens.

    You can actually see the stand here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerial_image

    But, what's the actual advantage? I'll leve that to you - do try to set up similar shots with your adapter, and with the bare HV20, and show us!

    If the distance and field of view match, I guess there won't be much of a difference - except that the image is upside down...


  5. #5
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Weve had terrible weather here this week. Shot at around 19.45 on a dull overcast evening. 100mm lens. Focus are at least 1m from lens.

    35test3-1.jpg

    35test3-3.jpg

  6. #6
    Director of Photography drapeama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maskinongé, Québec
    Posts
    10,499

    Default

    Interesting.
    I DO IT BECAUSE I CAN. I CAN BECAUSE I WANT TO. I WANT TO BECAUSE YOU SAID I COULDN'T.

  7. #7
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    And these two shots are from the same spot as each other, different focus...

    35test3-7.jpg
    35test3-6.jpg

  8. #8
    Legend Janke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    Yes, but what does it look like from the same spot, and the same view angle, with just the HV20's own lens? (I.e. zoomed to long tele.)

    That
    comparison would be interesting!


  9. #9
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Will put that on my list of things to try. I have no rig as such so am shooting handheld and inverted for now. Will try to visit the local park when the weather picks up and get some comparison shots with different lenses vs hv20 through its own optics. When calibrated properly it does have the complete focal range of the attached lens , including infinity. Got a shot of the moon the other night.

    A 100mm example video. Front chimp is 1.2m from lens and Waldorf and Statler are 1.5m away. Sorry its shaky, my tripod is awful at this level of zoom

    http://www.jessica-fox.net/monkeys.mov

  10. #10
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Thanks Janke, I'd like to understand more on how it all works.

    The actual advantage? Well for me at the least I have a decent manual focus control. Until I do some proper tests I cant say for certain what DOF advantage there is. Though I can say that different Nikon lenses give different DOF, despite the HV20 being zoomed and focused the same. This would indicate to me that the DOF characteristics are dictated by the Nikon lens, not the HV20. I'd be surprised if the exposure difference due to differing amounts of light hitting the sensor would have that wide ranging an effect. I guess I can use the photo button to get those readings.

  11. #11
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Limited to what I can try at the moment. Comparison videos - these show the spikes under one of my speakers
    Firstly, shot with the adapter

    http://www.jessica-fox.net/adapterspikes.mov

    Then with the hv20. Note I had to move it forward, roughly to where the adapter was to match the perspective.

    http://www.jessica-fox.net/hv20spikes.mov


    I hope you'll agree that in the first clip, the spikes have individual points of focus, whereas in the second (hv20 only) the rear two spikes are largely share the same one. I also filmed another clip before moving the hv20 forward and the results look much the same. I'd say the first clip, with the adapter and a 100mm f2.8 Nikon lens has a shallower depth of field. If anyone has trouble playing the clips, I can reformat them and post some more links. Cheers to a mate of mine for the server space
    Last edited by red5; 2012 May 1st at 19:02.

  12. #12
    Director of Photography drapeama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maskinongé, Québec
    Posts
    10,499

    Default

    In all the fairness of this, there's nothing much to excite ourselves about (top is the HV20, bottom is the Adapter):


    Might be a focusing issue (on the HV) otherwise it would be more "precise" when using the adapter (which I doubt):
    I DO IT BECAUSE I CAN. I CAN BECAUSE I WANT TO. I WANT TO BECAUSE YOU SAID I COULDN'T.

  13. #13
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    I dont know, I found it all very exciting. If you ignore the rotation and zoom mismatch I think there is quite a distinct difference. Top is the adapter

    diff.jpg

    135mm just arrived, but I have to go to work now.

  14. #14
    Legend Janke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    Not much of a difference, IMO.

    I see some chromatic aberration in the adapter shot, and the left-hand thingie is slightly softer, but the red text on the right looks almost the same.

    So, is it worth the extra hassle? Only you can decide...


  15. #15
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Indeed. I hate CA and have been put off buying other camcorders in the past after noticing it on posted clips. Not happy to see that, but theres also just a hint of it on the hv20 clips, though not as pronounced. I'll keep an eye out for it. At least I have the opportunity to experiment now with a bunch of different lenses. For wide angle shots, you may as well use the canon as it comes, but with a decent portrait lens with a lower f number, I think there is potential for separating the subject and background a bit more. Time and experimentation will tell.

    Does anyone think that having a larger objective lens will get more light to the sensor? I'm ready to be shot down in flames for asking that, optics are not my specialty.
    Last edited by red5; 2012 May 2nd at 13:32.

  16. #16
    Legend Janke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by red5 View Post
    Does anyone think that having a larger objective lens will get more light to the sensor?
    No. In an aerial image system, it's the camera's own lens that determines the f-number. So, if you have to zoom in a lot not to get dark corners, you won't even get f 1.8, but closer to 2.8.

    Plus, add the glass absorption in the extra lens, maybe one third to one half a stop, if it's a lot of glass.


  17. #17
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    When I depress the photo button the HV20 displays f2.4. So if I understand correctly, there should be no appreciable difference in brightness with a f1.4 lens over an f2.5 in this setup.

    In theory, would an f/1.8 lens have shallower DOF than an f2.8 of the same focal length, or does this sort of thing go out of the window too with an aerial image system?

    Many thanks by the way, I'd hate to buy any expensive glass under the mistaken belief it would be of benefit.

  18. #18
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    And I just discovered that the opteka lenes can be taken apart and the glass flipped round. This means I no longer have to have any taped joints in the system, as all could be screwed together. According to wikipedia the 35mm frame focuses 46.5mm behind the Nikon mount, so am trying to rearrange the assembly for that.

  19. #19
    Legend Janke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by red5 View Post
    there should be no appreciable difference in brightness with a f1.4 lens over an f2.5 in this setup.
    Correct. Except for the absorption of the glass in the lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by red5 View Post
    In theory, would an f/1.8 lens have shallower DOF than an f2.8 of the same focal length, or does this sort of thing go out of the window too with an aerial image system?
    Basically, without a screen, you only have an "enlarging and flipping lens" in front of the HV20. The f-stop speed of the additional lens affects nothing more than the tendency to vignette. You'll see that if you stop it down, the brightness doesn't change, but you get dark corners.


  20. #20
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    So the only way to have shallower DOF through such a system would be to have the hv20 as wide angle as possible? (where f/1.8 is possible) ??
    Last edited by red5; 2012 May 2nd at 15:45.

  21. #21
    Legend Janke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    That I don't know.

    You'd better make some tests, yourself...


  22. #22
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    I was tinkering again till late last night and discovered a couple things
    I noticed an uneven bokeh where things at the edges were smearing slightly outwards from the centre of the lens, when defocussing one way. Found that changing the number of macro tubes can eliminate this.

    The chromatic aberrations can be reduced but not so far removed.
    I'm sure at least one of the opteka lenses is misaligned, making the right hand side of the screen have a different focal distance to the centre and left (which match). After taking the one apart I noticed the lens could rattle around to some extent, so think that its possible to clamp one in slightly crooked.

    I'm going to persevere with this. Its not looking like this will be able to compete with the depth of field from an adapter with a focusing screen. But it may provide an alternative if a slightly shallower DOF is enough. I need a few more evenings to try and find a way to balance the whole system where CA and bokeh look acceptable. Then I'll try to make some comparison footage with both my HV20's either side by side or in an over/under arrangement. Janke, thanks again for your help, especially in explaining before I went all out on ebay buying expensive lenses.
    Last edited by red5; 2012 May 3rd at 06:10.

  23. #23
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default

    I seem to have some DOF control with the aperture on the Nikon lens now... Check out the rear spike in this clip as I click round the aperture ring

    http://www.jessica-fox.net/iriseffect.mov

  24. #24
    Valued Member red5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    38

    Default Opteka lenses not all 55mm, my mistake

    I was under the impression that the 10x macro lenses were all the same size but shipped with adapter rings to suit the size you ordered. This was what I got when I ordered some in the past (must have been ordering 57mm a non standard size). It seems it was not the case.Cos the 58mm pair I ordered from amazon (expecting to discard the converers) just arrived. They are a bigger lens in a bigger housing .For the shopping list at the top of this post, it is the 55mm ones I was using.

    I'm going to order some bits to try with the new size to see if it makes any difference.

  25. #25
    Legend Janke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    10,539

    Default

    Yes, but that's due to vignetting. You notice that the image darkens, more in the corners.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •