35mm Adapter Shootout

[SPZ]

Thanks, Joseph! 35mm adapters are here to stay, and this will be a very valuable and important ressource for years to come... Please make sure to test the shutter speed limit of the adapters, also! Some of them, like the Brevis have an adjustable motor that can be tweaked to increase speed! How far can you push it?

 

[Joseph Stunzi]

Will you be performing the bash your director's head with the adapter test? Though I guess a vibration test will suffice.

How are you going to document all of this? How about an HV20 and posting a timelapse, so that people can appreciate how much f$ing work you'll be doing.

I thought about the HV20 but like I said... add the HV20 and you then add that much more work with the guy. Definitely there'll be a timelapse or something of the sort. Maybe using a Canon 5D2... or even a Nikon D400 (shhhhhh)

We'll have to wait and see about details. Everything will be released in a PDF that details workflow and collected data. Think of it as a semi-scientific publication.

 

[astigmatic]

i would do the hv20 instead of the A1. They are pretty much close in terms of quality, however atleast this way you will be seeing how these adapters work on both large and small cameras(testing the flexibility).. instead of just large.. And the way technology is evolving, it won't be too long before adapters will be relegated to the domain of the small b-cam.

 

[Dino]

If I were King(and doing the incredible hard work and logistics--and thankfully I'm not), I would just use two cameras, the EX3 and HPX300. Both are full raster, so will show the difference in sharpness between adapters. To me, this test isn't about the cameras, it's about adapter sharpness, light loss, edge to edge, CA, and physical differences.

I would, of course, shoot a wedge chart with each camera wide open with taking lenses that are known to be sharp edge to edge, with good contrast(chip chart or DSC Chroma Du Monde chart) and MTF wide open.

I think that if an adapter has good sharpness and edge to edge and contrast with full raster cameras, it is safe to assume they will look good with lower resolution cameras--if the achromat doesn't negatively affect the result.

I'm sure whatever Joseph does will be valuable.

 

[mvansomeren]

If I were King(and doing the incredible hard work and logistics--and thankfully I'm not), I would just use two cameras, the EX3 and HPX300. Both are full raster, so will show the difference in sharpness between adapters. To me, this test isn't about the cameras, it's about adapter sharpness, light loss, edge to edge, CA, and physical differences.

I would, of course, shoot a wedge chart with each camera wide open with taking lenses that are known to be sharp edge to edge, with good contrast(chip chart or DSC Chroma Du Monde chart) and MTF wide open.

I think that if an adapter has good sharpness and edge to edge and contrast with full raster cameras, it is safe to assume they will look good with lower resolution cameras--if the achromat doesn't negatively affect the result.

I'm sure whatever Joseph does will be valuable.

I agree that from a scientific standpoint, that makes sense. However, I think people want to see how an adapter works on "their" camera. From a real-world standpoint, it makes more sense to test them on cameras that more people are likely to own. It's probably safe to say that more people own HVX200, 170, XHA1, HV20, 30, etc., than the HPX300. Hey, if Joseph can do it all, great. But if not, then IMO the test would be valuable to more people if the more mainstream cameras are used. This discusion is probably moot, as I believe that Joseph has already decided which cameras he will use.

Besides, what happens when a camera like the EX1 doesn't have good edge to edge sharpness with a particular adapter? Do other camera owners then assume that their lower resolution camera also wont? We alreadly know from experience that this is not the case. What if that happens with a HPX300?what conclusions should other camera owners draw from that test? Again, this is just my opinion, but this shootout would be more valuable if it appeals more towards the masses as opposed to those that own the higher end cameras. Best case would, of course, be to cover both.

 

[Dino]

I understand your points, I just think adapter resolution differences shot with an HVX200 are not going to be as obvious, although Joseph will have an EX1 for that.

 

[Joseph Stunzi]

Yup that's what the EX-3 is there for!

And like Jeff said, this test is about the adapters not the cameras. I'm going to have a HVX and a EX-3. If you want to see each adapter on your own camera, then please PM me and we can arrange something for the small price of $500. Okay I'm only kidding about the price... but the funny accented voice inside my head made it a lot cooler sounding. I'm not going to go out and rent a bunch of cameras just to show the differences between an adapter on a A1 and a H1. Or something silly like that.

I can't run these through their paces properly if I spend all my time testing them on a slew of cameras. Zacuto and I produced the Great Camera Shootout (although it had its flaws) for a reason! (and hopefully down the road there will be a third version of that test). However the point of considering smaller cameras is something I might just do simply because I feel with the coming RED Scarlet and what not.... we all have to start thinking about using our "brains." (okay that was too easy).

The only adapter I will be renting is the Mini35 and perhaps the Pro35 for the EX-3. But that's it. I'm considering looking at relays as an addition to this test... but in no way will I be comparing a EX-3 with 1/2 inch Letus relay to a EX-3 with a M2 on it or something like that. You'll get the comparison of all the adapters mounted traditionally. Then a separate comparison of the relays to the nonrelay option with their respective adapter. I'm not going to sit there and tell you if the Letus relay works with the SGBlade and what not. Because I feel these relays were designed to be used with a specific adapter... not your adapter necessarily. And if you want to save money... sell your adapter and buy the proper one. Also, I will be testing what I'm provided. If I'm only provided with one RotoRazor by Wayne... that's what I'm testing. So don't get picky unless you want to help a brotha out and ship some ground glass ova! Off the soap box now.

---

You're getting a proper comparison of 7-8 adapters:
Redrock M2e, Brevis MP.2, Letus Ultimate, Letus Elite, SGBlade, Cinemek G35, P&S Technik Mini35

You might be getting a preview of the new relays for 2/3 inch cameras if I can work some magic out:
Cinevate Relay, Letus Pro Relay, Letus Compact Relay, MotionFX

You're getting wedge charts, DSC ChromaDuMonde charts, chip charts all at different camera apertures with the lenses at their sweet spot and wide open.

You're getting proper light loss and optical analysis among other things using an OmniTek waveform system.

You're getting workflow analysis with consideration given to rails/rods systems.

You're getting functionality analysis... seeing if these adapters can stand up to the heat or cold of your shoot.

You're getting to see my beautiful face talk about all of this!

And you're getting some nice scene setups as well.

---

So if there's something I've forgotten whether it be an adapter or a test you'd like to see. Please PM it to me by Friday February 20th (my birthday actually).

If you, your company, your mother's brother's best friend, or anyone else would like to potentially become a sponsor of this amazing shoot... please also let me know. We'll be doing a FreshDV-style advertisement portion in the beginning, middle, and end of the shoot. And I'd love to have you help me do work!

 

[Smettli]

This is awesome Joseph,
Keep up the good work!

 

[Joseph Stunzi]

I try I do try!

 

[astigmatic]

well it's a known issue that small 1/3 cameras like the hv20/30 react different to adapters than do the larger cameras. The edge falloff properties tend to increase. Some adapter companies claim that they fixed it, some try to ignore the issue completely.. so in a way, it is about the adapter... but I'd rather see some sort of shootout sooner than a comprehensive one that's 2months away.

 

[keeganuhl]

Any timetable for when you think you might be done with the 35mm adapater shootout? I'm looking to purchase soon and wonder if it's worth waiting!

Thanks,
Keegan

 

[nantnee]

now??

 

[Joseph Stunzi]

now??

I'm shooting to do this test in May. Reasons for the postponement is to obtain the proper optical testing equipment as well as test some new products that might surface after NAB. Plus! It'd be nice to test all the relays in the mix as well wouldn't it?

 

[Take_1]

I would love to see the 170 in the shootout ... pleese ... I know begging isn't becoming. But pretty pleeese? :crybaby:

 

[Joseph Stunzi]

I would love to see the 170 in the shootout ... pleese ... I know begging isn't becoming. But pretty pleeese? :crybaby:

What difference is a 170 going to make comparatively versus a 200? They're both Panasonic. They both record in DVCProHD. They both have 1/3" chips. They have difference lenses and what not... but in my book 170 footage should be comparable to 200 footage. Read up on what Kholi posted about the 200A vs the 170 back when it was first released. If you give me a good reason, I'll try my best to add one in.

 

[Take_1]

What difference is a 170 going to make comparatively versus a 200? They're both Panasonic. They both record in DVCProHD. They both have 1/3" chips. They have difference lenses and what not... but in my book 170 footage should be comparable to 200 footage. Read up on what Kholi posted about the 200A vs the 170 back when it was first released. If you give me a good reason, I'll try my best to add one in.

Frankly, if it was the 200A instead of the 200 I'd be happy with that I guess. Simply because of the revisions to the camera giving it a cleaner image etc. The 170? Well, because I own one and its always nice to see exactly what you could be getting with it. 170 or 200A I'd be fine either way.

 

[Barry_Green]

Coming late to this party, but I've got a question for jstunzi... If it's a test of adapters, why would you even have two different cameras involved? For a test to have validity you typically want to minimize as many variables as possible. Having conducted shootouts before, I know how people will ask and beg and plead for more and more to be added, but frankly it seems like the complexity of the test increases by the square of the # of products being compared. So evaluating one product = 1 level of difficulty; comparing two products means it's 4x as difficult, comparing 3 products makes it 9x as difficult, etc...

So... why not pick one camera (maybe an HPX3000 or F950 using the Letus or Brevis relay?) and then compare all the adapters on the same set, same lighting, same camera body, same recording format, etc... and that way, the only differences would be due to the adapters themselves...

 

[Dino]

why would you even have two different cameras involved? For a test to have validity you typically want to minimize as many variables as possible.

So... why not pick one camera (maybe an HPX3000 or F950 using the Letus or Brevis relay?) and then compare all the adapters on the same set, same lighting, same camera body, same recording format, etc... and that way, the only differences would be due to the adapters themselves...

Barry,

This is similar to what I posted on this thread on February 16, although I was suggesting two cameras, both full raster--EX3 and HPX300. My feeling is that an HVX200 would not be able to resolve sharpness differences between adapters as well as a full raster camera.

This is the same approach that I would suggest with 2/3" cameras, like you I would vote for the HPX3000 with AVC Intra vs. an HPX500.

I don't think using 2/3" cameras and the B4 relays available by May would work because the relay can affect the image and different adapter brands might not be compatible with the B4 relay options.

I just spent half a day testing the Letus B4 Compact relay and while I don't want to get into my preliminary findings yet, the relay could affect the adapter image, and this assumes doing a proper white shading file which is mandatory for 2/3" cameras, as you know.

 

[Joseph Stunzi]

The 170? Well, because I own one and its always nice to see exactly what you could be getting with it. 170 or 200A I'd be fine either way.

That's what I thought and I totally understand!

Coming late to this party, but I've got a question for jstunzi... If it's a test of adapters, why would you even have two different cameras involved? For a test to have validity you typically want to minimize as many variables as possible.

Barry, I totally get what you're saying here. Having a background in science research, minimizing variables is a common concept to me.

The easiest way to think about this test is actually a combination of tests. One each for 1/3", 1/2" and 2/3" cameras and the adapter options available respectively to each.

However, I do see what you're saying and having the A1 and HVX200A would be redundant and add another variable.

So... why not pick one camera (maybe an HPX3000 or F950 using the Letus or Brevis relay?)

I've yet to see footage with the Cinevate relay. And according to Philip Bloom there is not way to easily attach either of the existent Letus relays to other adapters without modification. However this specific case was in regards to the Letus Pro relay and the Shoot35 SG Blade. So any comparison of relays (Pro35, Cinevate, Letus) would be with the respective adapter they're supposed to be paired with and not the whole gamut unfortuantely.

and then compare all the adapters on the same set, same lighting, same camera body, same recording format, etc... and that way, the only differences would be due to the adapters themselves...

Same set, same lighting, same camera body, and same recording format will be used for each of the "tests." But this will be accompanied by workflow, build, and functionality testing as well.

 

[Joseph Stunzi]

Barry,

This is similar to what I posted on this thread on February 16, although I was suggesting two cameras, both full raster--EX3 and HPX300. My feeling is that an HVX200 would not be able to resolve sharpness differences between adapters as well as a full raster camera.

This is the same approach that I would suggest with 2/3" cameras, like you I would vote for the HPX3000 with AVC Intra vs. an HPX500.

I don't think using 2/3" cameras and the B4 relays available by May would work because the relay can affect the image and different adapter brands might not be compatible with the B4 relay options.

I just spent half a day testing the Letus B4 Compact relay and while I don't want to get into my preliminary findings yet, the relay could affect the adapter image, and this assumes doing a proper white shading file which is mandatory for 2/3" cameras, as you know.

EX3 and HPX3000 work for ya Jeff?

Read the above post. It's not about cameras that's the hold up... it's about logistics and getting these adapters all together at the same time.