Are adaptors obsolete?

I STAND CORRECTED! The Canon 7D does 24/25 frames/sec already!! You can shoot an entire feature with no extra light.

As soon as Canon fixes its codec the party will be over for adaptors.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I would agree that ATM an EX (or other) with a Blade or M2 Encore, or Letus Ultimate, PLUS a 7D might be the best prosumer deal.

You can always just use the 7D for night stuff, where it will still blow people away with such a thick image regardless of stair-stepping, aliasing, or even jello.
 
I'm surprised that nobody has posted that Letus is now offering special reduced prices on all its adapters and relay lenses. Check out their website.
Cinevate reduced their prices on the Brevis a while ago, and SG Blade has always been very reasonably priced.
One of the advantages of an adapter is that you can use a wide variety of still lenses, unlike say, the Canon 5D, which would only take Nikon and Canon lenses.
If one is interested in a 35mm adapter, it's a great time to be shopping!
 
If you consider a 7D Canon costs barely more than an adaptor and if you consider the 7D Canon may give you better video with less light than an adaptor with Camera, you must come to the unavoidable conclusion that adaptors are already obsolete.
 
Jacotte, the 7D and other HDSLRs are fine when you are shooting for yourself, but when you are shooting for a client or producers as part of a team, you need professional audio connections, time code for editing, HD-SDI or component out video for monitoring, among many other considerations. It's not that simple when you need to conform to part of an accepted workflow.
 
So now it's about hiring more people and following a traditional workflow? Why not go back to film in that case?
 
astigmatic said:
By diffused he didn't mean the look you get using a diffusion filter. He was talking about how the 35mm adpaters that use a more diffused ground glass render a better filmic image.. like for example, Dillons work in this thread : http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=187839 , arguably rivals what you can get from any vdslr.
Click to expand...

You can still get that look with cheaper solutions on a full frame sensor. The reason it resolves that way is because the light is being diffused ever so slightly. The other effects you are seeing are the shallow DoF, the good lighting and comp, and the color manipulation from post.
 
I'm excited about full frame sensor video cameras. The shallow DoF look will no longer be ubiquitous with "Pro" and people can get back to story telling. Formats like VHS may even come back in vogue.
 
I think teh whole audio thing is overstated - you can always a get a dual system. However, HDSLRs have one big problem: very low TRUE resolution - most of that "sharpness" is just aliasing. To me it often (albeit not always) looks very off. It also make shooting many, many things impossible, like certain fabrics, bricks, tiles, wires, etc. unless they are out of focus. Even with shallow depth of field, there is always SOMETHING in foucs, and that thing had better not be a "problem surface" that causes moire or you are F-ed.

I get quality from my Redrock ME2 and Ex1 that is not possible with a 5D2 - yes, it's a lot of weight and fussing, but the images from it are better than what 5D is capable of even in moire-safe situations.

Aadapters are only "dead" for lower end and SD-only applications (such a weddings, which deliver in SD-DVD - so 5D fine.) If you are aiming to get on Discovery or PBS or ABC, I donl;t think a 5D cuts it except in certain very specidfic applications and contexts. The rest of time, side by side, a very good adapter, well- set-up and EX1 or other very good cam looks WAY sharper, smoother, less atrifacty than a 5D. i wish that were not true. My arms are sore from carrying around my rig, but I do think it is true.
 
James0b57 said:
You can still get that look with cheaper solutions on a full frame sensor. The reason it resolves that way is because the light is being diffused ever so slightly. The other effects you are seeing are the shallow DoF, the good lighting and comp, and the color manipulation from post.
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying that you couldn't get that with a dslr. I was saying the poster was misunderstood in what he was saying about diffusion

The term diffusion in this situation isn't about any soft bloomy effect.. it's about how more diffusion in a ground glass renders bokeh/specular highlights more film-like than a less diffused ground glass.
 
Last edited:
Short answer: No. I'd much rather have all the control my EX1 has to offer over a hybrid tool such as a V-DSLR.

Now, what I haven't seen anyone mention is practicality. I have the EX-1 with an adapter--which I've barely touched because it is a PITA to set up and take apart on a regular basis. So, I'm clearly not getting my return on that investment!

I have about $4000 in the adapter and rods. At the end of the day I have one camera and a fancy adapter/rods set up. If I'd bought a V-DSLR, I'd have two cameras now and I could do multi cam work (even if it means locking down the one camera and leaving it unattended). As silly as it may sound for a non-pro as myself to say this, there are times I wish I had a second HD camera (though not as high-end as the EX-1). Being ably to control DOF with it would be a simple delight.

I tend to think, however, the DSLRs are about as useful as my little HV-20 was before I sold it: great images, but lots of limitations that required costly add-ons (as in audio, viewfinder and all the other gadgets that have sprung up). So I think folks will continue to use adapters rather than buy into a hybrid system.
 
that pretty much summed adapters up! SETTING THEM UP SUCKS! well it sucks a little bit. With a vdslr you can run and gun like a bare camera. With a camera and adapter you need to spend a good chunk of time to set up and make sure everything is top notch. But I would never trade my camera in for a vdslr, video cameras were meant for VIDEO!
 
If they resolved the aliasing issue and audio issue we would not even be having this discussion. How long will it take before somebody does come up with a camera which solves these issues? I give it a year at most.
 
jacotte said:
If they resolved the aliasing issue and audio issue we would not even be having this discussion. How long will it take before somebody does come up with a camera which solves these issues? I give it a year at most.
Click to expand...

I think it will be longer. It depends on how Canon's still division can integrate with their video division whilst also keeping major competitors (and customers) like Sony and Panasonic in mind, who incidentally spend tens of millions of dollars on OEM Canon lenses in their products.
 
Last edited:
That's the day Red said they'll make their announcement, and the Scarlet should certainly hit all the points being discussed.
 
hopefully the release date turns out to be close.. so while people's credit cards are dented by recent dslr puchases, I'll get my scarlet sooner, as their cams float on ebay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top