ditching plans to shoot with 35mm adapter!

J

jake stutheit

Active member
Im not really sure why I'm posting this, maybe just to tell my experience with 35mm adapters. I dont mean to take the piss out of anyone. We are shooting a horror short in July, and I had plans to shoot with the HVX and a very popular 35mm adapter. I have a partner with this project who came up with the original idea, is storyboarding it, doing all the make-up / gore effects, and most importantly helping pay for it.

He and I were doing some screen tests on spec efx shots with my hvx and 35mm adapter. I was dumping right away to FCP to view results. When he was looking at the footage, he kept asking " why is the footage soft?" I explained to him the aesthetic of the device and the way it takes the " harshness " of video away and he simply just replied " No, it looks soft." So I said " OK, we'll put it to the pepsi challenge. "

We shot several scenes with the 35mm adapter using a 50mm nikon F1.4, and the same scenes using same light with just stock HVX. The first words out of his mouth were " See, it looks better without it." And unfortunately I had to agree. I have always noticed the slight softness the 35mm adapter delivers, and have tried the erase it. I have tried everything, changing diffusers, lighting conditions, F-stops, oscillation speeds, 35mm lenses, but still the footage looks a little soft. I cant make it look sharp enough.

Also, the MAIN reason I am abandoning the unit, is that during my tests with proper camera positioning, I WAS ABLE TO ACHIEVE ALMOST THE EXACT SAME SHALLOW DOF WITH STOCK HVX LENS! By simply opening the iris all the way, moving the subject a little closer to the lens and separating the background a little more I was achieveng almost the same shallow DOF, and with a much lighter, simpler camera. Now, this is in no way a comment on other peoples footage with their adapters. After all, it was those peoples awesome footage that inpired me to get one in the first place.

Maybe my adapter is faulty, maybe I'm doing something wrong, maybe I just like the look of pure HVX footage better, I dont know. But I do know that I am probably done using 35mm adapters. I'm not trying to convince anyone not to buy one, if nothing else thay make your rig look really bad-ass, just to consider that you may be able to achieve the shallow DOF you want by good camera positioning and good lighting. Just my 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
post some of your stills.
there are too many variables when using 35mm adapters to know what your referring too.
 
Thanks for the info

Might want to consider a couple paragraphs in your post to make it easier to read

Let us know when the photos are up
 
Very popular adapter? So popular you wont tell us?

Your shooting glass through glass, it will never be EXACTLY the same as your STOCK HVX.. But it should be DARN close..

If the softness is so noticable that it looks out of foucs, then it's your setup. I shot a feature with the Redrock, and had no problems. Many people think we shot on 35..

If you can get away with shooting it without the adapter, go for it.. But 90% of the time, the location or the action will not allow for perfect camera placement. There are to many variables..

Pictures will help in us judging.. Post them so we can narrow it down for you.
 
I posted some stills of a project I shot with the M2 recently, and someone commented about the footage being soft. Its probably because the hvx and the lens had to be fully open all the time, even with a ton of light. It was a good learning experience though.
here is link to the thread with the pics if interested: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=94634 -not trying to threadjack =)
 
I've also seen some soft film. With shallow DOF it can be tricky to be spot on. Good HD monitoring is a must have with any 35mm adapter or even film shoots.
 
This is one of the main reasons I haven't bought into the 35mm adapter craze. I have only seen one thread on this forum with some pics, from a 35mm adapter, that I thought were acceptable. Everything else I've seen looks soft. Now a lot of people will disagree and be quick to point out that it must be your set up or your lighting etc, etc. But until I see footage from these people to prove otherwise, I am not convinced.
I applaud you in your efforts to do side by side comparison tests and it would be interesting to see your footage
 
are you aware that you need 4X as much with a 35 adpter setup than you do wit ha normal setup. you have to be able to stop the 35mm lens down. its critical for maintaining sharpness in the image. NO 35mm lens is tacksharp at wide open. You will find that by stopping fdown the lens 1 -3 stops from wide open you will have an infinitly, sharper image, one that, in my experince is of the same resolution as the stock HVX lens. NO JOKE.

Also in addition to the increase in lens perfomance you will get more thant the 1-2" of DOF that a 50mm F1.4 lens yields at Wide open. the useable DOF can increase to about 1 foot. and that can lead to more of subject "looking" sharp, and make it feel as though the whole image is sharper.

It may just be a question of technique.


--------------------

Ozduc, i'll hook you up with some footage........
 
Just use a resolution chart and youll see that stopping the lens down will increase the resolution. Ive been doing this of sorts just messing around when im bored and i can almost get the same amount of lines from the M2 + a 50 dollar peice of glass as i can from the HVX Stock lens.

Just gotta really critically jump in there, and throw tons of light at it
 
Unfortunately I will be away from my gear for a few days and wont be able to post pics until friday or saturday. I guess I probably should have initially posted pics but I was in a rush. Timur, thanks for your post and poor technique may very well be my problem. I have seen tons of footage that looks good from these things, but right now I have a deadline looming, and I still can not get the look I want from this thing.

I know the locations we will be shooting and will have no problem getting good camera placement for shallow DOF, so for now I am abandoning it. Anyway, its sunny here so I am going camping and will try to post pics.
 
It definitely takes some extra setup time to get the sharpness you are looking for, but you can get it. I haven't been able to match the depth of field I get from my redrock M2 and nikon primes, and you can't get focus marks to do a solid focus rack with just the stock lens.

I have, however, shot things in the manner you were speaking of, with the HVX stock lens and the camera a LOOOOOONG ways from the subject, with the zoom pushed all the way in and the iris wide open. You can get decent DOF, but it's tough to get in tight places, and any time you move the camera it's difficult. But it's nothing like the DOF I get from my Redrock M2.
 
Cynic821 said:
Just use a resolution chart and youll see that stopping the lens down will increase the resolution. Ive been doing this of sorts just messing around when im bored and i can almost get the same amount of lines from the M2 + a 50 dollar peice of glass as i can from the HVX Stock lens.

Just gotta really critically jump in there, and throw tons of light at it
Click to expand...
Around what do you usually stop it down to?
 
I'm guessing he's using the m2 and not enough light. Also, like others have said don't shoot lenses wide open.

Jake, try the brevis if you only have a small lighting kit.
 
I think you guess wrongly , just go to see his profile and you will know what adapter he has. there are currently two threads strated by him.And he mention about changing diffuser, not many 35mm out there that i know can change diffuser. But maybe you are right if he is not using his own adapter. He might be using someone else's...

Jake, have you tried the getting critical focus with a external monitor? what about the X and Y axis?
 
Last edited:
might have been said already, but if the spinning glass wheel and it's motor are not perfectly perpendicular with the line of sight of the camera you would get a picture that is not completely in focus since the HVX would not be perfectly focused on the whole projection
 
When I got my HVX, my first Impression was, how soft the sharpness is. Compared with my old SONY PD 170, I was almost even a bit disappointed and compared with my small Sony HCR 1 HDV I am disappointed. (Only whats according sharpness).
In the last weeks I get used of this special HVX look, probably its a part of its "charme". But I was often wondering about the enthusiasm of people about the examples of 35 mm adapter footage seen here in the forum. I have nothing seen what is convincing (my taste) me. The most examples seemed to be simply unsharp, or not sharp enough on a focus point for professionell use. So I am hesitating to buy one. Aggravating for me is, that the HVX alone, needs a lot of light for brillant footage, how much do they need with an 35mm adapter?
Benn
 
The softmess might just be the contrast from the HD video footage you get and are working with and then when you see the 35-look... unfortunatelly I'd say the M2 does add an invisible grain, lol, it does soften the image but you do not want your image to be HD-video sharp anyway...especially if you hope to make your girls beautiful on screen... all actresses including my fiance, hate the video HD sharpness... lol... while not out of focus it is as if you work with a permanently mounted mild soft filter...

I also would love to be refreshed how many f-stops the M2 shaves off... was it one and 1/2 or just one?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top