Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wide angle reality check

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #76
    Originally posted by Bitmap Frogs View Post
    That Tokina is a DX lens which means on the AF100 will be a 13-19mm. It's got mild-to-strong barrel distortion so careful with brick walls.
    DX lens? Didnt know that... So not as good, but still. And I updated the youtube link on the 5D 20mm FoV. Apparently the one from my phone wasn't good. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4aZ-2cOB2s

    http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/37..._canon?start=1
    If you look at the distortion it isn't that prevalent in the inside area of the lens. This should generally be cropped out by the crop to 4/3s.

    Comment


      #77
      Originally posted by TheReverend View Post
      DX lens? Didnt know that... So not as good, but still
      Depends... if you want to go ultra-wide and fast on the AF100 this is a great lens =)

      Comment


        #78
        Originally posted by Bitmap Frogs View Post
        That Tokina is a DX lens which means on the AF100 will be a 13-19mm. It's got mild-to-strong barrel distortion so careful with brick walls.
        No, on the AF100 it is still an 11-16mm lens. The focal length does not change! Just the crop of the image the sensor sees.

        And I don't believe that spreadsheet is correct the sensor in the AF100 is wider than the actual 4/3 sensor in 16:9 as it has extra pixels on the left and right side to keep the diagonal distance consistent between both aspect ratios. So ignore the 16:9 box, and just use the 4/3 box as the diagonal is correct length for both aspects on the AF100.
        formerly know as grimepoch.

        Comment


          #79
          I don't consider myself an extremist but I can use all the wide angle I can get. Try shooting in the cockpit of a Cessna 206, or a verite' interview of someone in your typical 21st century office cubicle? I do this kind of thing on pretty regular basis, 14mm almost does it in 4/3 format, 11 or 12mm is almost ideal (2mm does make a significant difference). I have heard rumors on the photo side of a m4/3 12-60mm or possibly 12-75mm with a reasonably fast aperture sometime early next year from either Panasonic or Olympus.

          Comment


            #80
            Originally posted by aguia View Post
            I don't consider myself an extremist but I can use all the wide angle I can get. Try shooting in the cockpit of a Cessna 206, or a verite' interview of someone in your typical 21st century office cubicle? I do this kind of thing on pretty regular basis, 14mm almost does it in 4/3 format, 11 or 12mm is almost ideal (2mm does make a significant difference). I have heard rumors on the photo side of a m4/3 12-60mm or possibly 12-75mm with a reasonably fast aperture sometime early next year from either Panasonic or Olympus.
            I use my 11-16mm all the time, but the problem I see with it in tight spaces is that if you don't have the camera locked down, the perspective distortion (not sure what to call it) that you get looks so unnatural and can subtract from the shot if you don't want that to be the focus. Look at the South video by Bloom, when he pans the camera on top of the building, you get that push pull effect as things come in and out of the center of the FoV. At 11mm I definitely get this, and for visual effects work it is a NIGHTMARE. I have to lock almost every shot down as the perspective changes make certain compositions a nightmare.

            I've often felt that this is why you don't see super wide often on cinema shots, or if you do, the subject matter is very far from the camera UNLESS you are going for that distorted look (ie Gilliam's Fear and Loathing).

            Granted, not all use is for narrative, and with that, I think there is a distinct difference in need that people need to consider. For people shooting documentaries or other sorts of projects, where there is no set, or ability to change the environment (like a cave or something), then these desires have real considerable application. A lot of advice or example tends to focus on one aspect of 'filming' when in reality, there are many applications.
            formerly know as grimepoch.

            Comment


              #81
              Originally posted by aguia View Post
              I have heard rumors on the photo side of a m4/3 12-60mm or possibly 12-75mm with a reasonably fast aperture sometime early next year from either Panasonic or Olympus.
              That would solve the problem
              Sorry im not really good in english

              Comment


                #82
                Originally posted by grimepoch View Post
                I use my 11-16mm all the time, but the problem I see with it in tight spaces is that if you don't have the camera locked down, the perspective distortion (not sure what to call it) that you get looks so unnatural and can subtract from the shot if you don't want that to be the focus. Look at the South video by Bloom, when he pans the camera on top of the building, you get that push pull effect as things come in and out of the center of the FoV. At 11mm I definitely get this, and for visual effects work it is a NIGHTMARE. I have to lock almost every shot down as the perspective changes make certain compositions a nightmare.

                I've often felt that this is why you don't see super wide often on cinema shots, or if you do, the subject matter is very far from the camera UNLESS you are going for that distorted look (ie Gilliam's Fear and Loathing).

                Granted, not all use is for narrative, and with that, I think there is a distinct difference in need that people need to consider. For people shooting documentaries or other sorts of projects, where there is no set, or ability to change the environment (like a cave or something), then these desires have real considerable application. A lot of advice or example tends to focus on one aspect of 'filming' when in reality, there are many applications.
                Do you use the 11-16mm with a GH1 or Canon DSLR?

                Comment


                  #83
                  I've owned and used a nikon mount 11-16 on a gh1. Also have owned and used 11-16 on canon as well. What do you want to know?
                  J.Davis
                  jdMAX.com

                  Comment


                    #84
                    Canon 7D.
                    formerly know as grimepoch.

                    Comment


                      #85
                      Originally posted by grimepoch View Post
                      Canon 7D.
                      If you've used it on a 7D, the barrel distortion should be less pronounced on a AF100 because of the crop factor, yes?

                      Comment


                        #86
                        Originally posted by J Davis View Post
                        I've owned and used a nikon mount 11-16 on a gh1. Also have owned and used 11-16 on canon as well. What do you want to know?
                        I assume the 11-16 had worse barrel distortion on the Canon than the GH1 due to the extra crop factor with m4/3s.

                        Comment


                          #87
                          Yes, the barrel distortion would be less, but that is not what I am referring to. That push pull effect I mentioned is called Perspective Distortion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspec...photography%29) and that is what I was referring to that really detracts from a scene with a moving camera or objects close to the lens that you don't normally see in professional narrative work unless that effect is desired. This is why I try and use a 30mm for most of my shots on my 7D, and will be using 25mm on my AF100. I only use the Tokina (or the Canon 10-22) when I have no other choice or I am doing the shot for artistic reasons, or as I said, things are far enough away that the perspective distortion isn't a problem.
                          formerly know as grimepoch.

                          Comment


                            #88
                            Originally posted by TheReverend View Post
                            I assume the 11-16 had worse barrel distortion on the Canon than the GH1 due to the extra crop factor with m4/3s.
                            If you look at pictures that show the crop difference between both sensors, it's not cropping out very much, so how much reduction you get with the lost FoV is pretty small.
                            formerly know as grimepoch.

                            Comment


                              #89
                              Huh... Learn something new everyday. I assumed that the weirdness in the South pan was barrel distortion from the 7mm.

                              Comment


                                #90
                                Any barrel distortion or perspective distortion from the tokina 11-16 will not change when comparing the two cameras. The image circle projected out
                                the back of the lens will not change either. How can it? Its a lens. The physics of the glass and aperture hasn't changed so the image won't.

                                The only difference is the sensors. One sensor is slightly larger than the other so it will capture more of the image circle than the other.
                                Hence one will have a slightly different field of view than the other.
                                J.Davis
                                jdMAX.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X