35mm

[ronik15]

I just want to know how much is it to build a 35mm adpater for the dvx. (I already have the 35mm lens so I just need the rings and macros...)

Model : http://www.enormousapparatus.com/35adapter.htm

[Shaw]

This depends on what sort of adapter you are looking to make. Pretty much you can spend as much or as little as you want to (down to around $100). Of course, usually, the more you spend the better your results.

You will need to get the following:

Some sort of tubing. Optics tubes, PVC etc
A macro lens (costs around $24 for a cheap one - about $350 for a good one)
Lens mount (Nikon F mount in my case)
Most likely a step down ring depending on what camera you have

[J.R. Hudson]

I'm thinking of trying this (hell, been thinking of it for months; just dont know how)

http://www.mediachance.com/dvdlab/dof/index.htm

[ronik15]

ok so I just need a macro lens, a step down ring and a PVC tubes if I already have a 35mm lense?

how big and how large for the pvc tube (I've a dvx100a)

[Bill__Turner]

If you do not image on some sort of "ground glass" or screen you will not realize any change in the depth of field over the video camera lens itself, just wind up with an upside down image and reduced quality--- assuming the shallow depth of field look is what you are after.

Bill Turner
Century Division
Schneider Optics

[J_Barnes]

The thing people don't really consider in this equation is the lens cost.

Unless you've got a good rental house and a healthy credit limit/production insurance, you're not really going to take full advantage of any kind of 35mm adapter...homemade or not.

Good 35mm zoom lenses can easily cost well over a thousand. If you go for primes, you're going to rack up a lot of debt and you're still not getting the quality or versatility of a set of superspeeds or cookes.

On a static image, I'm sure you can get great camera shots, but as soon as you start demanding things from the lenses...ie- a rack focus, you'll see why still lenses are still lenses and motion lenses are motion lenses.

[JasonFox]

While I agree with Mr. Barnes somewhat, as film lenses and definitely different than still lenses, I think he misses the point a bit -- I would personally like a 35mm adapter to get something more out of the equipment I have at hand -- namely, the DVX. I'm not expecting it to replicate an Arri with nice film glass. And besides, some of us know some good still shooters well enough to borrow/rent lenses from them. ;D

Fox

[Shaw]

You can get some mighty fine still 35mm glass. Very fine, and rack focusing with real markings is easier than having to use a free spinning wheel - even one as good as the DVXs.

Besides, there comes a point at which we surpass the resolution of the DVX lens which makes anything additional a moot point. That and the fact that most home adapters are only going to capture partial res in the first place. To get a ground glass which captures very very fine details with good contrast is incredibly hard.

[J_Barnes]

My point isn't that it can't or shouldn't be done...my point is that the adapter is just an element in the chain of cost, and most people forget to figure in the price of renting or buying lenses...so when they start trying to figure out ways to frankenstein a $100 35mm adapter, they're probably going to be shocked at how much more expensive lenses actually can be.

[JasonFox]

True enough, Mr. Barnes. I'm lucky enough to have access to a couple of good Canon lenses, so I figure a couple hundred bucks is worth the attempt.

It's kind of like after I convinced my wife to get the DVX -- it was the tripod, filters, mic, etc. that shocked her.

Fox

[Shaw]

An excellent point Mr. Barnes. I didn't mean to sound like I was disagreeing with your main message - just wanted to point out for those who don't know that you can get good results without going for extremely expensive cinema lenses. Of course, this does require money :).

[Brett_Erskine]

Barnes-
Dont forget the rack in focus abilities (focus markings, internal focus, smoothness and some dont breath) of some of the better made older man.-focus only lenses. Choose a lens mount thats old and isnt as popular anymore and watch how much money you will save (ie. T-mount).

So thats not so much the problem. What IS the problem is that many people may be shocked how difficult it will be to do steadicam or just about any shot that isnt blocked out with the actors with these adapters. When moving around that much the shallow DOF will require a remote follow focus unit that ACTUALLY works with still lenses. IF you can adapt one it still might not make any sense $$$ wise to do it. So I recomend people know what they are getting themselves into before they go thru all of the trouble of making one of these.

[Shaw]

Brett,

Are you using Nikon lenses? If not what are you using? Same question goes for your medium format adapter. I've found that the Kiev Arsenal lenses are a great deal and a very good compromise between quality and affordability.

[ronik15]

I do already have the 35mm because my father is in photography

[J_Barnes]

For the record, most 35mm still lenses don't have lens markings and aren't designed to reduce breathing. That's most lenses, there are obviously exceptions.

The Kiev lenses are a great value, and you'd be using only the center of the lens in a 35mm situation so you'd reduce most of the edge artifacts (barrel distortion, edge sharpness) inherrent to that line.

You could probably find a really cheap Kiev or an old broken one and canablize a Kiev C (Pentagon/6) or Kiev B lens mount.

[Shaw]

I'm actually just going to buy a kiev C to Kiev B adapter and find a way to make that my mount. It's easy, cheap, and allows me to swap between different mounts.

I would actually be using a fair amount of the image because I'm trying to get rid of the whole macro lens thing. I'm still not sure if it is worth it or not as I already have access to a bunch of high quality still Nikon lenses. It's something to try at least! The lenses really don't show much distortion though they can be soft at the edges (save the 30mm fish eye of course).

[J_Barnes]

You should research that, I'm not sure which is longer, but I'm pretty sure that the plane of focus is not exactly the same between the two mounts.

Kiev lenses show their lack of quality at the edge of frame, so even when used in an enlarged 35mm frame size, you'd still not be using the full width of the lens element. Some of the lenses show more chromatic distortion then others. There's a few good Kiev user sites out there with a lot of test data.

[J_Barnes]

Of course, I didn't ask if you're talking about the Kiev 35mm versus the Kiev 120mm lenses. I'm assuming you're talking about the 120mm lenses.