Depth of Field effect without 35mm lens??

PaulyG

PaulyG

Member
Hello all. I'm an editor, but want to get into shooting. I'm purchasing the hvx200a next month. I was considering purchasing a 35mm lens with adapter mainly for a strong "depth of field" effect, however... I was doing much research and it may not be worth it because projects will take more time, more lighting, and ultimately more money. So... with that being said, I may not purchase it now due to budget constraints.

So my question is... To what extent can I adjust the "depth of field" on the hvx200a without a 35mm lens? How effective would these adjustments be. And if I'm correct, I have to decrease the aperture, right? And are there any other adjustments one can make to the camera to increase the depth of field effect?

Thanks everyone for viewing this. I would appreciate any help given!!!
 
It really depends on the look you want.

Me personally, would LOVE a 35mm cause it gets you that much closer to the film look, and in general, it's a nice look.

It may take a while to set up, and the focus/lighting might be a bit tough, but you have to ask if you really want to take that time? And if you do, you will get a nice image in the end.

To get the best depth of field out of any camera really, is to zoom in all the way and keep your f-stop/iris low..

Good luck,

Robbie
 
You want the iris completely open. Then, back the camera up and zoom in. The further in you zoom, the shallower the apparent DOF.
 
considering purchasing a 35mm lens with adapter
Click to expand...
you will find out really quickly that "a lens" aint gonna cut it. unless its an ULTRAFAST zoom - which can be very expensive.
a 35mm, 50mm or maybe 85mm will be ok to get you started. but you will discover really fast that you will need a handul of lenses to have the freedom that you are used to coming from a video zoom lens.
 
David's advice is the first priority, but I wouldn't use the lens wide open because of edge effects. stop down just a tad, but you need to be zoomed all the way in, and add light. With this technique you can get moderate fuzzy background, depending on how far away it is. just don't expect anything like you would see in a 35mm camera.
 
Great example, John. Yeah, a 35 adapter is a waste of money that can be better used elsewhere. You're already shooting on 1/3" chips and you're willingly going to lose more sharpness? It seems like adapters are a newbie's way to get around scuplting the light.

Again, shallow depth of field is not "film look". Any decent news photog shoots shallow DOF all day on his beta cam.
 
jimpatro said:
Great example, John. Yeah, a 35 adapter is a waste of money that can be better used elsewhere. You're already shooting on 1/3" chips and you're willingly going to lose more sharpness? It seems like adapters are a newbie's way to get around scuplting the light.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I gotta disagree here. Those are some pretty bold statements... Tell that to the incredibly talented users on here that use adapters.

I agree that an adapter is not the end all to film making. It's just a tool that can be utilized to produce a unique image that is tough to get with a stock camera. Saying it's a noobs way of getting around proper lighting is absolutely ridiculous and couldn't be further from the truth. Shooting with an adapter takes a great amount of skill, it's far from a "noobs" tool.
 
Then why is it that so many of us manage to attain shallow depth of field without an adapter? Of course I can't vouch for say, John Caballero's experience but his example shows it can be done. 26 years in the biz and I know what it takes to get there.
 
And I never said anybody was non-talented for using an adapter. When I see that someone won't take the time to light and comp with the stock lens in order to achieve shallow DOF, well I just figure they're either young or inexperienced or impatient or all of the above. Sure it takes time and expertise to set up an adapter, maybe those who use them haven't considered taking the same time to work without one.

I'll concede that shallower depth of field is possible with an adapter, and field of view is more controlled with a set of lenses. But great things have been done with the stock lens.
And the question constantly comes up: "Can I intercut footage shot with an adapter and footage shot without?" The answer is that the footage shot without is sharper and cleaner and has to be altered in post to better match adapter footage. To me, shallower DOF just isn't worth that.

Best to rent a Varicam if that style of shooting is so important.
 
it's possible but mostly only good for shots without moving the camera.

i did some experiments some time ago with and without an adapter.

http://vimeo.com/2055798
first 3 shots are without an adapter. The rest is with the Letus
(stolen song i know :D )

greets
 
I'll pipe in here. I am not a real pro like some of the very talented people on here, but I do have a few years experience, and have some OK shooting skills. I purchased a Brevis adapter a few years ago to get that elusive shallow DOF and " film " look. It is a fun toy, but takes your production to a whole new level. It is nothing like picking up your hvx and shooting with it. You need a much burlier tripod to handle the extra weight, a good rod system so as not to put pressure on your threads, an external monitor for critical focus, more lights handy to make up for the light loss, an array of lenses that can be 600-1000$ just to get you started, a proper matte box, a good follow focus if you want quick and accurate rack focus's. It is quite an investment of time and energy to properly operate a camera with a 35mm adapter. In the end, I opted to ditch it in favor of a more simple set-up, but am thinking about re-examining them. Just know that if you decide to get one it is not as simple as buying one and using it. It's like shooting with a completely different camera when you have it, and also eliminates any possibilty of flying under the radar on a set. The only times I have been asked to not shoot somewhere was when I was using a 35mm adapter, due to the big and professional look of the camera rig.
 
i am turning out to be fortunate to not be able to afford an adapter....my short movies are starting to be mistaken as being shot with an adapter. it's actually made me not stress out on getting one. i'll get it when i can, but i'm enjoying the lens of my XH-A1.
the benefits of learning my lens has come along way. and i didn't realize it until recently.

here's a short movie done this past Easter weekend: http://vimeo.com/channels/hd#4113884


Chris
 
I don't care how many years and how much skill/lighting prowess one has, a small room with a 1/3" camera, even when shooting wide open and zoomed in for a head and shoulder shot is not going yield a shallow depth of field--it's hard to achieve with a 2/3" camera, much less 1/3". Shooting with a 35mm adapter is not a crutch, it's a skill and it provides results that aren't possible with a stock lens and 1/3" palmcorder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top