heathfranklin
11-26-2007, 05:02 PM
hi everyone, looking at getting the 500 and have some lens ?'s. some of this stuff is objective some subjective so please point out which if you answer. also, please don't comment that something is a fact is you're not 100% sure. not to sound rude but a lot of money involved and i want to get as close to getting this right as possible. thanks in advance...
first, regarding bokeh. i'm aware of focal length and aperature. known for years to go longer focal length, throw in an ND and open her up to squash DOF. easy enough. what's new to me is the electronic imager side. i'm told that a 2/3" CCD is slightly smaller than sup16 so they're close but obviously much smaller than 35. my first question:
1. if this is true, isn't the CCD on my canon rebel xti significantly smaller than a regular 35mm CCD or film? i have found no differences in the bokeh using this camera, so why is it different with 2/3", super16, 35?? or is it the change in focal length used (EF-S versus EF) for the same frame compensates which means there really isn't a difference in CCD size (re: bokeh anyway...)
on to lenses: i keep hearing that the fujinons and canons recommended (such as the 'packaged' ones by B&H) aren't that great. i'm sure they're pretty good. a continuous F1.5 for the fujinon seems plenty fast to open up with. what am i missing that the adapters have the advantage? is it bokeh because they go to a 35mm size first and then capture that with the smaller CCD?
2. how would an adapter with the 'normal' nikons fair against the packaged lenses. i don't see any speed difference really, except maybe.... at 50mm...??? it seems that from a price standpoint, new Nikon primes are cheaper than one zoom. normally i would think the higher priced lens would be of better 'quality'. so, how does this affect:
a. DOF (objective?)
b. overall quality (subjective)
4. how about the cine lenses from canon or fujinon?
i guess i don't want to 'waste' the money on one of the packaged lenses to turn around and get an adapter but don't want to get stuck with doing things the 'hard way' when a simple zoom would have been sufficient. i think the cine style lenses are a bit much out of my range right now. plus, much easier to fit a 4lb zoom into a bag and hop on a flight than all the adapter, primes, etc. i come from a film background but i'm not going to do things the hard way if there's not a decent advantage. of course, primes are usually better quality....
btw - has anyone seen the anamorphic adapter from canon for their cine style lenses?
first, regarding bokeh. i'm aware of focal length and aperature. known for years to go longer focal length, throw in an ND and open her up to squash DOF. easy enough. what's new to me is the electronic imager side. i'm told that a 2/3" CCD is slightly smaller than sup16 so they're close but obviously much smaller than 35. my first question:
1. if this is true, isn't the CCD on my canon rebel xti significantly smaller than a regular 35mm CCD or film? i have found no differences in the bokeh using this camera, so why is it different with 2/3", super16, 35?? or is it the change in focal length used (EF-S versus EF) for the same frame compensates which means there really isn't a difference in CCD size (re: bokeh anyway...)
on to lenses: i keep hearing that the fujinons and canons recommended (such as the 'packaged' ones by B&H) aren't that great. i'm sure they're pretty good. a continuous F1.5 for the fujinon seems plenty fast to open up with. what am i missing that the adapters have the advantage? is it bokeh because they go to a 35mm size first and then capture that with the smaller CCD?
2. how would an adapter with the 'normal' nikons fair against the packaged lenses. i don't see any speed difference really, except maybe.... at 50mm...??? it seems that from a price standpoint, new Nikon primes are cheaper than one zoom. normally i would think the higher priced lens would be of better 'quality'. so, how does this affect:
a. DOF (objective?)
b. overall quality (subjective)
4. how about the cine lenses from canon or fujinon?
i guess i don't want to 'waste' the money on one of the packaged lenses to turn around and get an adapter but don't want to get stuck with doing things the 'hard way' when a simple zoom would have been sufficient. i think the cine style lenses are a bit much out of my range right now. plus, much easier to fit a 4lb zoom into a bag and hop on a flight than all the adapter, primes, etc. i come from a film background but i'm not going to do things the hard way if there's not a decent advantage. of course, primes are usually better quality....
btw - has anyone seen the anamorphic adapter from canon for their cine style lenses?