Can you turn a prime lens into a zoom lens?

Status
Not open for further replies.
21946yv.jpg


...to Mr.Ryan Patrick O'Hara

I suspect he did look up my post history to nail this one though... No need. CMOS sensors render images differently from CCDs... it should have been clear to most of you I was not using a CMOS based camera from looking at the samples provided. Oh well... the mystery has been solved. I was planning to post samples with various other Nikon and Zeiss primes, but some of your comments have not been very nice. AND, my request to embed vzaar videos was completely ignored ( you'd think after 1509 views SOMEONE would know? ) But, I guess at least I haven't been banned, so maybe I should be grateful? :grin:
 
Jokes aside, I do believe there is some merit to this particular method. I'd compare it to using tele-converters / extenders on DSLR lenses, except that the cost is significantly higher and set up is a bit more complicated. You do get to manually control the lens' aperture and focus, so as far as handling, operation and results, whatever prime lens you've mounted on the M3 becomes your camera's new lens. The M3 lives up to its claim of "near transparent" operation, and thus breathes new life into your old camera. Light loss is minimal, as is sharpness, but in the end you are still limited by the camera's built in limitations. As far as being able to zoom in or out, I do find it advantageous while filming, and as you saw from the examples, quality does not suffer from zooming in. As far as I know only the Redrock M3 and possibly the Letus Ultimate allow you to zoom all the way in without losing focus. This proved to be very beneficial in my experience, particularly when using Macros and long Telephoto lenses. Just imagine using something like the Canon EF 400mm F 2.8 L series lens and nearly doubling its useful range. Would that not be advantageous for Wildlife / Event videography? Of course , I know most people these days would rather use the GH3 to get that "extended range", but that brings its own set of problems / limitations.
 
Last edited:
We've known about this technique since 35mm adapters came out years ago. Why did you string us along for a full week for this?

EDV said:
CMOS sensors render images differently from CCDs... it should have been clear to most of you I was not using a CMOS based camera from looking at the samples provided.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with anything? First of all, no, you can't easily tell CCD from CMOS, not without a whip pan to reveal rolling shutter or shot of the sun to reveal vertical blooming. But how would that have told us that you were using an adapter?

Is this really a way "to turn a prime lens into a zoom lens" or even make it "behave" like one? More truthfully, isn't this making a zoom-lens-prime-lens combination work like a zoom?

EDV said:
one of the moderators had me banned from DVX a few months ago
Click to expand...
David W. Jones said:
I vote for a second banning.
Click to expand...

This was kind of funny, but this whole thread was really a waste of time.
 
combatentropy said:
We've known about this technique since 35mm adapters came out years ago.
Click to expand...
Then maybe you should have been able to guess it.

combatentropy said:
Why did you string us along for a full week for this?
Click to expand...
Nobody forced you to follow this thread. Besides. There's a new generation of cameramen and forum members that have never even heard of CCDs, they started on DSLRs and are now "moving up" or "looking to move up" to the GH4 or the C100. So it's CMOS all the way now, from amateurs to high end RED Dragon users. Get informed. And yes, I can tell CMOS from CCDs most of the time, the 4:2:0 desaturated look is a total eyesore and I see it every day on YouTube Ads and TV ads. It's especially obvious on skin renditions, and as other forum members have observed CCDs render skin tones more accurately.
 
EDV said:
Then maybe you should have been able to guess it.
Click to expand...

I thought it would be something new. Even when it was guessed, I thought, surely no.


Nobody forced you to follow this thread.
Click to expand...

The wording of the thread and the way you made us wait made me think it was worth following.


There's a new generation of cameramen and forum members that have never even heard of CCDs
Click to expand...

What does CCD or CMOS have to do with this technique?
 
You neysayers make me laugh. The title of this thread is a question. I later rephrased it but it was still a question. It wasn't what you expected but... so what? All lenses tested were primes so it was legit. Go start your own 2000 views thread and see how far you get.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top