View Full Version : Home Depot 35 mm Adapter Guide Coming Later Today!
Policar
06-15-2005, 11:27 AM
UPDATE:
Here it is. Really rough, so send feedback on what I should clarify.
http://home.comcast.net/~wauhkies/adapter/index.html
UPDATE 2: Better examples (There are a few chunks of dust, though...I didn't clean the UV filter very well. Only one of the dots is actually on the focusing screen, the rest is just dust.)
http://home.comcast.net/~pfhorwitz/1.jpg
f1.4 means a VERY shallow DOF.
http://home.comcast.net/~pfhorwitz/2.jpg
Now you all know where I live!
http://home.comcast.net/~pfhorwitz/3.jpg
When I was very young, I used to climb on this rock. Pretty good resolution.
http://home.comcast.net/~pfhorwitz/4.jpg
Rack focus part 1.
http://home.comcast.net/~pfhorwitz/5.jpg
Rack focus part 2.
http://home.comcast.net/~pfhorwitz/6.jpg
Much less chromatic abberation except on the edges. Blame the cheap macro lens, or--if you choose to try and make something like this--take my advice and get a better one.
http://home.comcast.net/~pfhorwitz/7.jpg
Other rack focus part 1.
http://home.comcast.net/~pfhorwitz/9.jpg
Other rack focus part 2.
looking forward to your final guide
Policar
06-15-2005, 02:47 PM
Bah, this is taking too long to finish (by which I mean, an hour or so). I'll post it late tonight, but it's going to be a bit sloppy.
reservoir
06-15-2005, 02:54 PM
That's the way we like it!! :happy:
One big Sloppy Jalopy!!
http://www.actf.com.au/learning_centre/school_resources/productions/rtt/images/sloppy_jalopy.jpg
~reservoir~
Policar
06-15-2005, 04:50 PM
Where did you get that image? Anyhow, here it is:
http://home.comcast.net/~wauhkies/adapter/index.html
thisiswells
06-15-2005, 05:59 PM
Even with the rough grain and severe vignetting (sorry for stealing your thunder, policar), there will always be a use for this kind of gritty, hard edged homebuilt adapter look in addition to the polished look from a production grade 35mm adapter. While this has nothing to do with policar's design, here is some footage from spring '04 shot with my own homemade "marla35" adapter. It definitely has a unique look. Enjoy!
http://homepage.mac.com/thisiswells/blu.mov
*Quicktime 7 Required.
Policar
06-15-2005, 06:09 PM
No, that's okay. The images clearly show major vignetting so I can't deny it, although it's not nearly as bad when zoomed in further and using a 50mm lens, but it is always there to some extent. I'll defend myself by saying that I designed this in two hours two days ago, with the goal of making a decent 35mm adapter for 40 dollars or so (without the Nikon lens mount, that's about how much it costs, macro lens included.). I wanted to share how easy it is because I know a lot of people want to build home-made 35mm adapters but are daunted by how complex they seem. I know I was. So I'm hoping more to show how cheaply and easily something decent can be made, and from there make it better. By no means do I plan to compete with production grade adapters simply because a wax focusing screen and ebay lenses are optically pretty horrible and tolerances are far from perfect with designs like this.
I'm planning on buying a guerilla 35 or micro 35 in the future, anyhow. But, until then, I'm going to have fun playing around with this thing and seeing how far I can refine it. It does give a really cool organic look, which I'm having a lot of fun playing around with.
Mike Smith
06-15-2005, 11:46 PM
Has anyone tried using an RB67 2 1/4 film camera. They have a really nice bellows that may make these projects easier. I guess any 35mm bellows would work just as well now that i'm thinking about it.
Mike Smith
thisiswells
06-15-2005, 11:50 PM
Couple of the guys here have Mamiya or Hasselblad's. I looked into using an old Olympus bellows but it wasn't worth it. Better/cheaper to use pvc pipe than ruin a good bellows. Good idea, though.
DEATHTOPRINT
06-16-2005, 05:49 AM
chromatic abberation is what is occuring, more than "vignetting", in vignetting, you see the outside of the lens, or black corners of your image, w/ chromatic abberation, you are seeing distorted light by some reason having to do w/ the optics setup. this is present in a big circle around your main point of focus on those images above.
the guerilla 35 had it at first too... then it was fixed supposedly.
DEATHTOPRINT
06-16-2005, 05:49 AM
however, nice job. this is cheap, damn cheap. and looks good.
DEATHTOPRINT
06-16-2005, 05:51 AM
the second image it really shows. where u can see the blue light or noise coming off the trees to the top right.
Policar
06-16-2005, 08:37 AM
I'm pretty sure it's related to the cheap macro lens (it was 18 dollars, after all), which is why I'm looking for a better one that's also not so expensive. By zooming in further, it's fixed to some extent, but there's always softness in the corners and some chromatic abberation, even more than vignetting is an issue.
UPDATE: Check out the new images. Much less CA and none in the middle of the image. It's only on the edges, due to the cheap macro lens. With a better macro lens, it wouldn't be there. I'm going to do some experiments next time I'm at home depot with chopping up the PVC a little shorter in an attempt to reduce edge softness, vignetting, and CA further.
Policar
06-17-2005, 09:16 PM
Well, I tried using a super-thin layer of wax. There was next to zero light loss, but the static grain was horrible. Agh...the thing is bugging me to death.
GenJerDan
06-18-2005, 04:17 AM
You're going to *want* some light-loss. If the screen is too transparent, you'll get a brighter circle in the center where you can actually see the lens, rather than just the "projected" image.
Hmmm... A lot of the darkening-around-the-edges effects we're seeing may really be brightening-of-the-middle.
Dan
Policar
06-18-2005, 07:17 AM
Oddly, the wax seems to diffuse light well and really handle hot spots just great. I think I just need to zoom in further; my wide angle lens (28mm) seemed even wider than it should so I think this is the issue. The image quality with super-thin wax was totally unacceptable, but the light loss was about a stop at most. Oh well, now that I've destroyed my projection screen I'm going to have to try and remake it; hopefully I'll get it working again.
GenJerDan
06-18-2005, 10:22 AM
Just goofing around yesterday, know what I tried as "ground glass"? 6 layers of overhead project transparency designed for laser printers. :-) It has a grain that looks a bit like Tri-X, but not as defined...and with 6 layers, I got it opaque enough, and the "grain" blended together, pretty much cancelling out.
But that was just goofing around.
Dan
DEATHTOPRINT
06-19-2005, 09:23 AM
CHECK THIS OUT.
http://ideaspora.net/oldskool/alain35-2.html
this way seems pretty easy and pretty clean if you get it right.
bikefilms
06-20-2005, 12:50 AM
Wow, new life to a GL-1. I like the idea of having no motor involved in this DOF unit. no noise. Forget the spinning CD??
There are a handfull of videos that incorporate vignetting, as added in post, so the bit this causes may have great appeal.
-ab
Zac Henke
03-14-2006, 07:05 PM
68 and I owe you one.
man, why are the edge soo out of focus?
Oddly, the wax seems to diffuse light well and really handle hot spots just great. I think I just need to zoom in further; my wide angle lens (28mm) seemed even wider than it should so I think this is the issue. The image quality with super-thin wax was totally unacceptable, but the light loss was about a stop at most. Oh well, now that I've destroyed my projection screen I'm going to have to try and remake it; hopefully I'll get it working again.
wax is supposed to be the best in terms of all the GG
what kind of wax are you using? Could be the problem.
theoretically it should proved the least grain and least light loss with a nice diffusion depending on coating.
tony404
03-14-2006, 09:40 PM
I was looking does anyone make a quality 72mm +10 macro ? I cant find one online.
no man, gotta get an asian off of ebay like me
tony404
03-14-2006, 09:50 PM
I wonder why that is
Policar
03-14-2006, 11:31 PM
Whoa, this thread is old...
I should really update with the changes I've made in the design, but ultimately the one thing I want to improve most (the macro) is sadly hard to find a good replacement for. The out of focus edges are mostly the Asian brand macro, although this can be dealt with by stopping down the DVX's aperture.
If anyone finds a better macro for cheap, please do share.
tony404
03-14-2006, 11:46 PM
Whoa, this thread is old...
I should really update with the changes I've made in the design, but ultimately the one thing I want to improve most (the macro) is sadly hard to find a good replacement for. The out of focus edges are mostly the Asian brand macro, although this can be dealt with by stopping down the DVX's aperture.
If anyone finds a better macro for cheap, please do share.
is it possible to use a smaller macro then the possibilities really open up.
Policar
03-15-2006, 12:03 AM
It might be, with step up rings. My intuition says that 58mm or larger would probably work with an 100a.
whats the differnece in using a +10 58mm to a +10 72mm macro?
Ed Kishel
03-15-2006, 09:31 AM
keep in mind, that the farther away from the macro the object is (that you are trying to enlarge), the more smearing you will see around the edges. The 58mm asian macros will work fine (at least in the OUR35), IF your adapter doesnt push it too far from the screen.