16 and Super 16 Lenses on Adapters? Has this been answered officially yet?

A

Avenger007

Well-known member
I have an assortment of 16mm and Super 16 lenses that I am dying to try out but I don't have a PL mount. I prefer not to throw down $350+ on the mount if the lenses give less than stellar results. Also, I can't decide whose PL mount I want to purchase. The Brevis mount has micro collimation, I have no clue how good the Redrock's is, and the SG takes a month to build and costs over $600. My other option is buying a letus and getting their PL mount with the $60 price cut but even then it'll take a month to send that order.

So I'm eager here folks. Has anyone tried some S16 primes/zooms? Do they cover the frame? Any vignetting? Sharpness? Dennis maybe we could strike a deal for testing your mount on some Zeiss glass? :) I think the Brevis is the only one that can even ship to me within a reasonable time frame.
 
Last edited:
We just finished testing an entire S16 PL mount set from 8mm to 50mm on the Brevis MP.1 flip. They work, but when compared with the 35mm LOMO cinema lenses we tested at 28mm, 50mm and 85mm, did not hold up as well as I'd like. The largest reason for this was the fact that even S16 image frames sizes are teeny-tiny when compared to the 35mm, or 35mm SLR. This requires close to full zoom-in on most cameras, and in our experience, edge softness is an issue when using max zoom.

So speaking for the Brevis only, I'd say if you've got them, use them. If you have the choice to use 35mm cinema, or SLR lenses with low breathing, I'd look at them in that order of preference over S16.
 
So using a super 16 lens will give DOF similar to a super 16 film camera?
If you wanted the "super 16" look, could you use a 35mm cinema or SLR lens, zoom in with the fixed lens, and get the same result?
 
The ground glass is the same size, but a S16 lens won't cover the whole ground glass. A 16mm/S16 lens is going to project a smaller circle of illumination. You'd have to zoom in tremendously to have the camcorder fill the frame without serious vignetting.

Having not tested this, it seems reasonable to say that you'd get 16mm-like DOF out of a 16mm lens, and S16mm-like DOF out of an S16mm lens, because the actual projected image isn't going to be any bigger than a 16mm/S16mm frame of film.
 
That's it exactly Barry. The issue with the S16 lenses in our testing is two-fold:

1. The zoom in required is doable, but most video camera's lenses are not so great at max zoom in terms of edge fall-off. A 35mm SLR frame width is 36mm but a 16mm frame width is in the 10mm area...so almost 75% less.

2. At this high zoom level, grain etc. is more of an issue, particularly if you're using a camera with the resolution of an EX1.

At the higher focal lengths, projected usable image can exceed the S16 gate size by up to about 50% meaning a 50mm S16 can be framed with the field of view of say a 35mm S16. If you affix an 8mm, expect usable frame sizes of no greater than the intended 16 or S16 gate..meaning max zoom-in on most cameras.

In our testing of the Lomo 80mm (35mm cinema format) we found that you could frame with a field of view equivalent to the 50mm...meaning the 80mm projects a sharp usable image size exceeding 36mm wide. Crazy, but true with CF1le. With a limited lens range, this is a sneaky way to turn an 80mm into effectively a 50-80 zoom by varying your frame width on the adapter. This is something that might drive a DP crazy, but who said adapter use had to be conventional :-)

My disclaimer here is that we've only tested 16mm lenses with the Brevis adapter, CF1Le, and the XH-A1/EX1.
 
That's a good point, longer lenses do frequently cover a bigger circle. So the net effective range might be more than you were otherwise expecting.
 
It sounds like you will get an extremely soft image from having to zoom in so far to the GG, even if you are lucky and the lens covers a larger circle than Super 16. Not to mention that the depth of field characteristics of Super 16 are similar to that of a 2/3" video camera. So in the end you are getting results that look like super soft 2/3" video. Yuck.


Marco
 
I just tested a zeiss 10-100 (super16 conversion) with a Red in 3K and 4K modes, it almost covers 3K after 50mm, and vignettes in 4K(super35). But there is a 16mm adapter for the jvc100/200 series, that may be an option?
 
But there is a 16mm adapter for the jvc100/200 series, that may be an option?
Click to expand...

That would work as long as he knows it will use the field of view of a 1/3" sensor, making all his focal lengths effectively longer. A 12mm lens will look more like a 50mm 35 equivalent, etc.


Marco
 
marco0782 said:
That would work as long as he knows it will use the field of view of a 1/3" sensor, making all his focal lengths effectively longer. A 12mm lens will look more like a 50mm 35 equivalent, etc.


Marco
Click to expand...

Thats incorrect. The JVC HZ-CA13U does in fact give the same FOV as 16mm. It is not a hallow adapter but features an optics that somehow transmit the full image circle to the 1/3" chips. (With no ground glass)

You can read up on the adapter here: http://www.bluesky-web.com/HZ-CA13U.pdf
 
In theory, if you could zoom on two lenses at once with GG in between, in opposite directions, you could keep the same composition and only change the DOF. Kind of like a focus pull except not quite. That could be a great character POV effect.
 
If you could rack iris on the 35mm lens and the HVX simultaneously to compensate each other you could change the depth of field inside a shot.


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