EX1 lens equivalent to what zoom lens?

[Lor]

Does anyone know what Nikon zoom lens is equivalent to the EX1 lens? Sorry, not sure if I'm making any sense here.

[gabrielflorit]

I think it's something like a 35mm-400mm.

[Noel Evans]

Focal length: f = 5.8 to 81.2 mm (equivalent to 31.4 to 439 mm on 35 mm lens)

[Lor]

Many thanks for the response. The reason I ask is, if I'm going to put an adapter and some Nikon lenses in front of the camera lens, I need to buy some lenses that will cover those range if I decided that I need those range that came with the Sony EX1 zoom lens.

Again, thanks for the information. So I may need the 17-35mm lens, maybe.

[Buck Forester]

Hey Lor, I'm a still photographer and I'm not 100% how the 35mm adaptor works on video, (I'm sure someone else will answer), but the sensors on the EX1 are not full frame (35mm) so there will most likely be a 'crop' factor that changes the field of view % on your lenses... so a 17-35mm won't have a 17mm field of view at the wide end, etc. I'm not sure what the conversion factor is with the EX1 though.

[Grug]

Buck the adapters work by focussing the video camera's lens on to ground glass the size of a 35mm still frame, so there is no crop-factor as such. Properly adjusted a 35mm adapter should give you the same FOV from your lenses as they'd have on a still camera body.

[Buck Forester]

Thanks, Grug, I didn't realize that. I know the non-full frame sized chips in Canon still cameras, like the Canon Digital Rebels and the 20D, 30D, 40D series would crop the lens field of view because of the smaller sensor. I just assumed it would be the same on digital videography with less-than-full-frame chips.

So if I end up getting a Letus Ultmate (been pondering if for some applications) and I slap my Canon 17-40mm lens on it, my field of view will be a full 17-40mm as if I had it on my full-frame Canon 5D still camera?

[gabrielflorit]

I don't know if you'd want to put the Canon lens on an Ultimate. No manual aperture - to change iris you'd have to take the lens off the Ultimate, put it on a dSLR, change the iris with the dSLR, take the battery off the dSLR, thus making the lens "fixed" on that specific f-stop, take the lens off the dSLR, and put it on the Ultimate. Too much hassle - talk about stifling your creativity. Go with Zeiss or Nikon.

[thxdave]

How closely does the 16:9 shape of the Sony's image follow the standard 35mm film aperture? Since you are zooming in on a "floating" or aerial image that would normally be 24mm x 36mm, is the 16:9 frame a close match or is it more rectangular?

[Buck Forester]

gabriel, dang it! I remember somebody else mentioning that too. I have a whole range of Canon L glass. I'll probably hold off on the 35mm adapter for a while anyway. I have too much to learn right now as it is!

[TheMusician]

Buck, you would have to look into this a little further, but over on Reduser.net, all the Canon glass users are chomping at the bit for a Birger Mount, which is an adapter that goes on the RED camera that allows you to put Canon Glass on it.(It is in the Lense section) But it is unique because it is a smart mount that allows you to change focus and iris with knobs on the mount. I posted a question asking if you could use it with a Letus Extreme to attach your Canon glass. I was told that it was tested with a Redrock M2 and it worked fine. So if you are heavily invested in Canon Glass, that adapter might allow you to use your lenses with the Letus, and to have control over focus and f-stop. But again, you would have to look into it further to be certain. Here is a link to an enormously long thread about it http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6149

[Buck Forester]

Hey, thanks TheMusician! I will delve into that link... looks good!

[kubalsky]

Thanks, Grug, I didn't realize that. I know the non-full frame sized chips in Canon still cameras, like the Canon Digital Rebels and the 20D, 30D, 40D series would crop the lens field of view because of the smaller sensor. I just assumed it would be the same on digital videography with less-than-full-frame chips.

So if I end up getting a Letus Ultmate (been pondering if for some applications) and I slap my Canon 17-40mm lens on it, my field of view will be a full 17-40mm as if I had it on my full-frame Canon 5D still camera?

Hey Buck, check out Phil's site on adapters if you have time. Good for anyone starting out with adapters like me..

http://www.hostingphpbb.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=3&mforum=philipbloom

[Lor]

Okay, so what's the diference between those Nikon or Canon lenses versuses those interchangable lens that cost ten grand or more.

[gabrielflorit]

For starters: continuous iris. As far as I know, all SLR lenses have fixed f-stops.

[TheMusician]

Lor, another reason cine glass cost so much has to do with minimal breathing. On most still lenses(not all), when you change your focus the image slightly zooms in or out, and this phenomenon is called "breathing". Cine glass has been designed to cope with this by adjusting for movement while focusing. This is complicated and expensive. Also, the distance that the focus ring travels on a still is very short which makes it difficult to hit focus smoothly, whereas on cine glass it is a much longer distance and accurate/smooth focusing is much easier. There are other reasons, but I believe these are the main two. Plus, demand - the demand for still glass is much higher than cine glass. If a company can only sell 100 lenses a year, those lenses have to be expensive to cover operating costs.

[Barry_Green]

How closely does the 16:9 shape of the Sony's image follow the standard 35mm film aperture? Since you are zooming in on a "floating" or aerial image that would normally be 24mm x 36mm, is the 16:9 frame a close match or is it more rectangular?
Lots of potential misunderstandings here, starting with: what KIND of 35mm film aperture?

35mm still photography = 36x24, a 1.5:1 ratio
35mm movie film ("full aperture") = 24x18, a 1.33:1 ratio
35mm "academy" film = 22x12, a 1.85:1 ratio
35mm "super35" film = 24x13, a 2.35:1 ratio

16:9 has an aspect ratio of 1.78:1, which is very close (within a few pixels) of 1.85:1. So if you're trying to emulate 35mm movie film at a 1.85:1 ratio, the 16:9 comes very close. If you're trying to emulate a still camera or full-frame or widescreen 2.35, you're going to need to crop.

[Lor]

Barry, thanks for the info. As I am going through some of the Nikon of lenses with a 35mm adapter versus what's provided by Sony EX1 or perhaps available on the EX3, I like to know the difference so can make a wise choice as to what I really need and when to use what.

[Lor]

Okay, here's something I'm still unclear about. How is it possible that the EX1 lens is 35mm to 400mm but the lens is not that long compare to something like the Nikon 80-200mm f2.8? I would think that since the EX1 lens covers a wider range it should be longer but yet the Nikon 80mm to 200mm is much longer. In addition, the Sony EX1 lens zoom and focus are all done internally. Meaning, I don't see the lens barrel getting longer and shorter as with many still picture lens often do when zooming or focusing. I guess that's why cine lenses are more expensive.

[thxdave]

Thanks Barry. I was referring to 35mm still cameras (that's why I included ther 24x36 reference) but I guess I could have been a little more specific. Given the 1.78:1 ratio of the EX1 and 1.5:1 for 35mm framing, then I'm assuming that I will be cropping off a little of the top and bottom of the lens adapters' image once you fill the frame horizontally, correct?