Yes I'm afraid I have another adaptor.

Hi Moochy this was incredible....thank you ..very inspiring..can you please list all parts with diameters..and step rings also....thanks in advance.
 
i just realized that this thread has had over 20,000 views...

in any case, i have another layman's question; hopefully i'm not the only one trying to understand this----what is the point of the whole vibrating GG???? i read the article (very in-depth) shoot-off off the letus35 flip and the sg35 adapters and it mentions that the mechanism vibrating the GG in the sg35 was audible at TEN FEET AWAY!!! wtf??? i plan on getting an adapter by summer, and cannot imagine having something making so much noise on my camera. how the hell are you supposed to use a cam-mounted shotgun?

someone explain this please if you have the patience:eek: and why ed's adapter doesn't have/need one.

david
 
The vibrating GG is supposed to eliminate any grain or small scratches that would be visible on a static GG. Some users are using Nikon D screens because of their fine grain pattern. I believe Ed is using one.
 
davidpula said:
i just realized that this thread has had over 20,000 views...

in any case, i have another layman's question; hopefully i'm not the only one trying to understand this----what is the point of the whole vibrating GG???? i read the article (very in-depth) shoot-off off the letus35 flip and the sg35 adapters and it mentions that the mechanism vibrating the GG in the sg35 was audible at TEN FEET AWAY!!! wtf??? i plan on getting an adapter by summer, and cannot imagine having something making so much noise on my camera. how the hell are you supposed to use a cam-mounted shotgun?

someone explain this please if you have the patience:eek: and why ed's adapter doesn't have/need one.

david
Click to expand...

Hey David,

The reason for vibrating(or even spinning) the ground glass is to try and hide the grain. Especially with high definition, grain can be quite noticeable on most ground glass. When it is vibrated or spun, the grain is so blurred that the camera can't pick it up.

Ed's adapter doesn't need to vibrate (as far as i know) becuase the grain is very fine and standard dv resolution can't pick it up noticably. (correct me if im wrong??)

Hope this helps.
 
thanks guys...

to me, it just seems a bit crude to use this noisy (no pun intended!) option for the adapter. most microphones are extremely sensitive and the last thing i need is to deal with this extra noise when recording audio.

and aesthetically...those AA baterry holders look as if they were ripped out of a speaking teddy bear's belly.

am i nit-picking?

ps. i've seen just about every bit of footage available from all the adapters currently being made by diy people, and sold online...most of it is indeed impressive (though i am thoroughly disappointed by the sg35's strangely soft and "waxy" look---it is not acceptable as far as i'm concerned...check out the shoot-out in the articles section), the one clip i thought was truly stunning was this clip made with the m2 from redrock http://www.redrockmicro.com/footage/DVX100A/the_letter_full_size_plus.mov

no chroma aberration, no "soft" look, no "waxy" look, no vignetting...don't know how much light loss there is, but the lighting in the clip does seem meager...

incredible!
 
Last edited:
I believe the unit that Wayne sent in is defective. I have read a lot of nice feedbacks from his SG35. My unit was defective as well but I don't see this is a good excuse. I wish people can do a next shoot out, at that time, Wayne and myself will be ready to face G35, M2, MPIC, Mini35, and any adapter that will be commercially available. Thanks.

Quyen
 
24pordeath said:
Hi Moochy this was incredible....thank you ..very inspiring..can you please list all parts with diameters..and step rings also....thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

you need a pvc cap to fix your mount on it

the aluminium tube it 60mm and the pvc cap must be sliding in as shown on documentry.


my x10 macro lens is approx. 32mm away from the D screen

I can't really tell you about the part I'm using as they are coming from whatever I can put my hands on.I don't shopping for them, I look around and if I see something that could help, I take the thing apart...No prisoners :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

My wife is going to get mad at me when she will what I've done with her electric teeth brush..mind you, fair enough, I refused that she use my ED35 to clean her teeth...:)
 
Letus said:
I believe the unit that Wayne sent in is defective. I have read a lot of nice feedbacks from his SG35. My unit was defective as well but I don't see this is a good excuse. I wish people can do a next shoot out, at that time, Wayne and myself will be ready to face G35, M2, MPIC, Mini35, and any adapter that will be commercially available. Thanks.

Quyen
Click to expand...

Hey letus, Nice to have you here, I looked at the review of your flip adapter, did you use a prism, or 4 mirrors?

is the light loss mostly due to the flip?

I met Wayne once, Actually I think I was supposed to be his first customer, I didn't buy the SG35 at the time because it wasn't just right for me, but I can garantee to you all that his adapter wasn't making a noise that I could ear 10 feet away. the adapter, was very silent.

Anyway I wish you well letus...
 
re: Vibrating GG. If done right and quietly (which isnt cheap) it will allow almost zero grain as the screen is always in motion. Best best for HD.

With SD like the DVX a fine grain screen with a good fast lens will show very little grain in most shooting situatuations. With the D screen I feel no need for any motorized rotating or vibrating mechanism. I dont need the sound.

Most people want to see ZERO grain and no softness through thier adapter, they want the same sharpness that thier stock lens gives, and I can unserstand why.

But those should also keep in mind that since the point of the 35mm adapter to for the DOF found in tradition film cameras/movies, the slight grain and diffusion (not softness- there is a difference) that the adapter has, gives the footage an organic feel that you find in film stock.
 
Last edited:
I agree that grain and diffusion are inherent to film. The only problem I see those is that our grain is static, while grain from a film stock is in motion. But I'll be perfectly happy with a good static adapter if I can get it near grainless. :D I'm not gunning for perfection here, just decent depth of field without glaring grain. If most people who watch my work can't see anything wrong with it then I'll be fine. I don't expect my primary audience to be all of the crazed DIYers, of which I gladly group myself with. :D I have a GG ordered that should have promising results. I won't mention what it is yet, as I'd like to test it first. But I will post footage as soon as I have it.
 
that is true, films grain is not static, but in the case of the D screen, the grain is so smooth, it adds an organic texture to the image and not a rough granular surface. We defininitely aggree here: we can expect perfection or we would use panasonic lenses on film camera.

I will say that the only person who notices these things are cameramen and those of us who build them, when I show the footage to average viewers here at work, no one mentions grain or abberation. We look for these things, the viewer looks for the story.
 
Edweirdo said:
I will say that the only person who notices these things are cameramen and those of us who build them, when I show the footage to average viewers here at work, no one mentions grain or abberation. We look for these things, the viewer looks for the story.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. I think that the average Joe isn't going to notice grain. Flecks of dust, probably, but not picky enough to see the grain.

I did a little experiment last night with promising results. I took the macro completely out of the equation and just had the DVX focus on the focusing screen I am using. I had a UV filter and a step down ring between the DVX and the screen so it gave it enough distance to allow the DVX to focus on it. The focusing screen I am using is too small though, so it doesn't fill the frame. But I am getting another GG next week or so that will fill the frame at that close distance. If I can cut the macros out entirely I shouldn't have to deal with chroma aberration. Plus the length of the adapter will be shortened. Time will tell. I'll post results when I am done.
 
ovjamaica said:
I did a little experiment last night with promising results. I took the macro completely out of the equation and just had the DVX focus on the focusing screen I am using. I had a UV filter and a step down ring between the DVX and the screen so it gave it enough distance to allow the DVX to focus on it. The focusing screen I am using is too small though, so it doesn't fill the frame. But I am getting another GG next week or so that will fill the frame at that close distance. If I can cut the macros out entirely I shouldn't have to deal with chroma aberration. Plus the length of the adapter will be shortened. Time will tell. I'll post results when I am done.
Click to expand...

I was wanting to try this also. I think I will give it a shot. The two disadvantages would be a longer adapter and having to zoom in all the way correct? Is there anything else that anybody can think of that would cause problems?

I see all of the points about the small amount of grain (if any depending on light). I agree. I still want to finish the vibrating GG so I can compare the difference. I should have some test footage of the vibrating GG (test version) done this weekend. I found a nice quiet vibrating motor in a playstation controller. I just have a few things to finish up today on it before I can assemble it.
 
snodart said:
I was wanting to try this also. I think I will give it a shot. The two disadvantages would be a longer adapter and having to zoom in all the way correct? Is there anything else that anybody can think of that would cause problems?
Click to expand...

I think you are misunderstanding me. The adapter is not longer by doing this. In fact it is shorter. My zoom was all the way out, as wide as I could get. My focus setting was down to 00. This brings your focusing distance down to about 2 centimeters, so the distance between the DVX lens and the GG was about that. Basically my setup was thus: DVX : UV Filter (w/ glass) : 72mm to 55mm step down ring : GG just inside threads of 55mm spacer tube : 55mm to 52mm coupler : Nikon BR-3 mount adapter : 50mm Nikon lens.

My adapter is similar to the one Mike Dawson and Twocik have made. Very similar, except that instead of using two +10 macro's right next to the GG I removed them entirely and just had the DVX lens focus on the GG. Like I said above, I'm waiting to test this with a more appropriate screen, and I'm hoping to have said screen next week or shortly thereafter. It's being shipped out of New York but the order is still being processed. But I will post results of this setup when I have all of the components.
 
jamaica and ed you're both totally right about a typical viewer not noticing what we notice. however, we shoutn't give ourselves too much headroom as far this is concerned--a friend was over last night (who knows nothing about cameras) and i was explaining how exciting it was to have a 24p camera, how it resembled film....and i lost her. i put on hbo and a hollywood film was playing. i then switched the channel to cnn and with amazement had to ask her if she saw the different "feel". she didn't. i almost fainted. she didn't understand what the hell i was raving about.
my point is an average viewer does of course care more about the story and acting, etc. but if non professionals like us want to actually put our stuff on tv, dvds, fetivals, why not make every possible effort to have it "look" as good as we can make it. i'm probably not going to make an adapter on my own; i'm gonna give these sub $1000 guys some time to get theirs as clean as possible and grab one then.
 
Of course. Dust, noticable grain, specs, color smearing- they are all unacceptable. When I say the average viewer wont notice it- Im talking about when we put our noses up to a screen and say...

"there it is...see! Right there, behind his ear! See those specks, thats the grain of the GG I'm talkin about! Oh crap, look at the left edge of that light pole, there in the corner. See how its kind of blue...no- on the left side........!"

I watched the November DVD and listened to the audio commentary by DP Nancy Schreiber and she kept pointing out imperfections that I didnt notice until she pointed them out.

I'm just saying people shouldnt expect optical perfection from a DIY kit from ebay parts and PVC. Everything within your control should be fixed, but the things that come from the homebuilt nature of our projects, dont stress it cause the audience wont.
 
Ok -- long time lurker on this thread -- with a quickie question -- then I'll shutup and learn somemore.

I've searched the threads but haven't found the info so ...

I've got an old Nikon FTN slr from the early 70's -- is the screen from this camera useable ?
 
AOL CD Case Screen

AOL CD Case Screen

I got one of those AOL free CD's in the mail this morning at work and I was doing a boring job (burning 100 DVD'S) so I cut out a piece brought it home and threw it into the adapter I use for testing screens and here's what I came up with. Sorry it's so dark I just shot it outside in my carport where it is really dark and I wasn't paying attention much to the exposure. Anyway......it was just for fun.

http://homepage.mac.com/marlene.mac/iMovieTheater12.html


This weekend I WILL MAKE THE PERFECT WAX SCREEN........ok maybe not, but I will keep trying until I succeed.

marlene
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top