The best 35mm adapter I've seen so far

Guys--don't make us add 35mm adapters to our list of sex, religion, and politics. I'm cleaning up this thread and maybe you can all agree to disagree.
 
No worries Barry - all good here. Jack has a valid point. But I do like the vibe off this adapter and hope we can get some more info on it. Rawfa - you still here to lead us?
 
I don't want to flame this topic more, but i will ask this one more time:
How can you talk about sharpness, softness, chromatic aberration, etc from a 358x287 clip?

My personal opinion is that the most adapters in the 35mm world in front of a 1920x1080 machine can achieve this sharpness at 358x287.

But, please tell me your thoughts about this. If there is way to do that, i want to know because it would help me a lot.
 
I agree - but I'm interested to see a bigger picture - I'm not strictly interested in this adapter per se but in it's lack of artifacting to do with sharpness generally (No chrom-ab for example which is visible in even small mpegs if you look out for it) - maybe this system can be carried over to another adapter then. It's more the techniques that interest me. I definitely gasped when I first saw the footage - yes, just a gut reaction - but I liked what I saw and am curious.

Apparently he used some Nivea fluid (having the effect of cooking oil on paper I imagine - making it more transparent - This also seems to reduce some of the diffused "halation" look that I associate with Adapters. I'm getting Wayne's SGPro (a great looking adapter IMHO) and emailed Wayne about it - he said he'd tried this system in 2005 but found it unsatisfactory as it interfered with the bokeh effect.
 
Actually I've just reread Wayne's email and he says that :
" It gives much less lightloss, and nice colours and contrast"
Click to expand...
If jack's interested this might answer his earlier query - the oil paper analogy would seem to me to increase contrast making denser blacks possible. On the other hand it might cause flare (which I would think unlikely)because - as Wayne points out:

"It is basically reducing the GG's diffusion and increasing light transmittion"
Click to expand...
Wayne says he abandoned this system because :

But it effects the bokeh of the final images, and does not look as film like
Click to expand...
I think I'm responding to the lack of diffusion. I feel it looks cleaner than I'm used to seeing from adapters. I imagine hotspotting would be an issue on the GG
 
SGpro r.2 is a great and tested adapter. It will be tough to regret this purchase.

[off-topic] 8-15 of march i will start shooting my first "serious..." short film with professional actors, and professional crew generally. I will use hvx/sgpro combo at 1080p25 and 720p50 and the final stuff will be transfered to film by a co-producing company.

I could show you (except the trailer) some full frame grabs of some scenes if you want to see how the adapter behaves with pro lighting.

Sorry for the off-topic,
theodoros
 
jacks Back ! woohoo!:laugh:

Bokeh - the soft out of focus circles (sometimes hexagons etc depending on how many aperture blades your lenses have) .

Canon-35mm-Bokeh-Sample.jpg
 
theodoros - bring it on! I would Love to see that. I purchased one BTW having looked long and hard at your footage (nothing brokeback in there BTW - strictly business) - which looks great.

How do I get a look?
 
its the way the lens renders teh out of focus part of the image. Good lenses for example would show a point of light out of focus as a white disc.

1169125313.jpg



"bad" bokeh, is uneven wonky discs. Some people dont like the Gaussian type bokeh, but i actually like that sometimes. the trouble is it doesn match up with another lenses bokeh so it looks funny switching back and forth between them. Bokeh is a byproduct of the lens. not really the adapter.
 
jamestmather said:
theodoros - bring it on! I would Love to see that. I purchased one BTW having looked long and hard at your footage (nothing brokeback in there BTW - strictly business) - which looks great.

How do I get a look?
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot James.

I will start a thread once i'll have some footage in my hands.
It should be 20 of march or so.
 
Yeah I don't really mind the gaussian bokeh - on video it can help a little sometimes as the "bleed" off the highlights becomes softer - cheating a film-like response to highlights - which is generally where video gives itself away I think.
 
theodoros, Thanks a million. Good luck on your shoot. Looking forward to seeing your stuff (if past footage is any indication then it should be great)
 
jamestmather said:
Yeah I don't really mind the gaussian bokeh - on video it can help a little sometimes as the "bleed" off the highlights becomes softer - cheating a film-like response to highlights - which is generally where video gives itself away I think.
Click to expand...

CinegammaD on DVX, Low KNee on HVX. This solves the problem. it rolls the overexposure off smoothly.
 
jamestmather said:
theodoros, Thanks a million. Good luck on your shoot. Looking forward to seeing your stuff (if past footage is any indication then it should be great)
Click to expand...

Many many thanks james. I'll keep you updated!
 
TimurCivan said:
Bokeh is a byproduct of the lens. not really the adapter.
Click to expand...

Timur has made a good point here, and I think it’s important to note. In the adapter world, we seem to misuse the term 'bokeh' to describe the adapters output of the out of focus area's. Now, Bokeh is of course a by-product of the 35mm attached, but depending on the ground glass/image element used, the adapter will 'render' this bokeh in different ways.

This misuse of the term can cause confusion, especially when someone says 'wow, that adapter has great bokeh.'

We really should use the term 'bokeh' to describe what it should - the out of focus areas produced by the 35mm lens.

We should start using a term like 'bokeh rendition' to describe the adapters ability to render that bokeh as it should, meaning, how the bokeh would look if the lens was connected to a film camera.

I think its important to recognise the difference between these 2 seperate things and not to get the 2 mixed up.

The general aim in designing a 35mm adapter is to get the 'bokeh rendition' to match that of film as closely as possible, with as little lightloss as possible.
 
Last edited:
There, isn't this better. I can feel the love in the house.

jamestmather, sorry but I do not have links to any high resolution footage. I very much would like to. Maybe I can get Ettore to make a cameo appearance here to shed some light on everything.

BTW, the slogan for this adapter is "Got milk?" :D
 
kyledroid said:
Similo, Smile, and Eighteen Seconds are really great examples of what the g35 can do, but lets give some love to Macgregor, the director. He has an amazing eye for cinematography, and I believe he could take any of these commercially available adapters and create some truly beautiful footage from them.
Click to expand...
I think he used the Letus 35 for Eighteen Seconds which confirms your take on his skill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top