Digital Bolex D16 Lenses

The D16 and its lenses aren't meant to be some end-all, workhorse thing. Why would the D16 team release a lens that every other lens manufacturer in the world can make? Why would they release *anything other than a niche item* in the first place? Not everyone is going to need one, or want one, and that doesn't make this camera or these lenses a "waste," it makes them unique. Maybe wind yourself down Barry, before you tell me how stupid I am for not adopting the exact gear, specs, workflow, and aesthetic choices that you seem fit to proclaim superior.

It's an interesting device, and it's something no one here has shot with.

As a doc filmmaker, a narrative filmmaker, and someone who's worked quite a bit with 16mm, I think this camera sounds incredible. Half the **** I pay for in a lens or a camera becomes unused or unwanted the moment I apply it to a given gig. I'm grateful for the chance to only pay for what I need, without sacrificing resolution, in a device that's designed for people that would rather shoot with what's at their disposal than spend 9 months saving for a single prime lens because someone on a forum said it was a "smart buy."

I'm not in the lens industry, or the camera industry; I'm in the film industry. I'll shoot a movie with a miniDV through a milk bottle if it's the right look for the story.
 
oneonetwothree said:
The D16 and its lenses aren't meant to be some end-all, workhorse thing. Why would the D16 team release a lens that every other lens manufacturer in the world can make? Why would they release *anything other than a niche item* in the first place? Not everyone is going to need one, or want one, and that doesn't make this camera or these lenses a "waste," it makes them unique. Maybe wind yourself down Barry, before you tell me how stupid I am for not adopting the exact gear, specs, workflow, and aesthetic choices that you seem fit to proclaim superior.

It's an interesting device, and it's something no one here has shot with.

As a doc filmmaker, a narrative filmmaker, and someone who's worked quite a bit with 16mm, I think this camera sounds incredible. Half the s*%t I pay for in a lens or a camera becomes unused or unwanted the moment I apply it to a given gig. I'm grateful for the chance to only pay for what I need, without sacrificing resolution, in a device that's designed for people that would rather shoot with what's at their disposal than spend 9 months saving for a single prime lens because someone on a forum said it was a "smart buy."

I'm not in the lens industry, or the camera industry; I'm in the film industry. I'll shoot a movie with a miniDV through a milk bottle if it's the right look for the story.
Click to expand...

I think you have misread what Barry was saying IMO. I saw his point as this: If you are DBolex, why bother spreading yourself too thin by building lenses at this point in time. Esp if those lenses are not practical at all. D Bolex said they wanted to build a camera that was a "shooters" camera that got out of the way. They simplified the menu system, the design, the workflow...and now they want to pair the camera with lenses that require complicated means of use.
Barry really wasn't talking about the camera itself, just stating his opinion that a fixed focus, fixed aperture lens is a bad idea and a poor investment by the company. I agree 1000%. I like a lot of things about the DBolex...those lenses are not included.
 
That's exactly what I was saying. I said nothing negative about the camera, and instead said "don't get distracted by other jobs, focus all your energy on getting the camera done."
 
Barry_Green said:
That's exactly what I was saying. I said nothing negative about the camera, and instead said "don't get distracted by other jobs, focus all your energy on getting the camera done."
Click to expand...

Come on Barry. At least own it and not try to tell us you said anything other than what you said.

How about this - you obviously don't understand optics and how lenses work. You're ill-informed, ridiculous post is bordering on wacky. It's a terrible opinion and simply bad, you should kill your thoughts immediately.

Now can you honestly say I haven't said anything negative?
 
I said nothing whatsoever about the CAMERA. I said the LENSES were a bad idea.

If you're going to make broadside allegations, at least read the post first. Go ahead. Search the thread. Find what I said. I said the lenses (aka "the lenses") were a terrible idea, and any effort expended on them is going to take away time and energy that could better be spent making sure the camera is better.

If I said otherwise, please point it out.
 
I have to agree with Barry on this. The camera is already behind schedule, in fact I thought it was suppose to be ready to sale last summer.( this is from memory, so I may be off) Either way, get the damn camera built, if it sales, then make some accessories people might buy. It just makes no sense to spend even a day on anything but the camera at this point. I imagine this is close to the reason several people I know pulled their orders, they didn't feel the company was doing what it needed to get it in to the hands of the investors.
 
^^ Absolutely, get the damn thing out already. I understand they had to make sure they had the body and everything in order first....but now the news section over there is becoming ludicrous. They've had the "completed" body ready for over a week now, yet instead of working 24/7 getting it up to par and done, there are discussions of this lens mount, that lens mount, we may do this, we may do that...lol. That relaxed style is one of their strengths, but it's a weakness as well. They have backers waiting for their cameras, but sometimes the focus just seems to be misplaced. And you are right Maran, they said last summer....which I predicted wouldn't happen. They seem to be right there at the end now....but good lord, pick a mount, release the camera and play with add ons later!
 
Barry_Green said:
I said nothing whatsoever about the CAMERA. I said the LENSES were a bad idea.

If you're going to make broadside allegations, at least read the post first. Go ahead. Search the thread. Find what I said. I said the lenses (aka "the lenses") were a terrible idea, and any effort expended on them is going to take away time and energy that could better be spent making sure the camera is better.

If I said otherwise, please point it out.
Click to expand...

So your point Barry is that you said nothing negative about the camera - you only said negative things about the people making the camera.
Things like they know nothing about optics, or how lenses work, they are ill-informed, their ideas are terrible, ridiculous and they should kill these ideas immediately. Sounds like pep talk to me :-)

The point of my post was to direct your exact negative words about the people and ideas of the Digital Bolex Crew onto you - so that you can see what being negative looks like.

You can say you never said anything negative about the camera itself - or the colors of the rainbow - but my allegation is exact. I used your own words to do so.
 
pitstain said:
So your point Barry is that you said nothing negative about the camera - you only said negative things about the people making the camera.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry -- are we even in the same conversation here?

You attacked me all over the place for saying bad things about the camera. I didn't.

I said negative things about the lenses. Which is what this thread was about -- someone asked specifically for opinions on the lenses, and I offered an opinion on that project. And I pointed at one specific instance where someone did make a statement which is completely false and gives me serious concern about what they're designing.

Sounds like pep talk to me :-)
Click to expand...
At what point was it ever implied that it was supposed to be a pep talk?


The point of my post was to direct your exact negative words about the people and ideas of the Digital Bolex Crew onto you - so that you can see what being negative looks like.
Click to expand...
When was there a discussion about "being negative"? Are we even in the same conversation?



You can say you never said anything negative about the camera itself - or the colors of the rainbow - but my allegation is exact. I used your own words to do so.
Click to expand...
No, you made a personal attack against me on a topic of your own invention. You took the discussion on a tangent, then attacked me on that tangent.

I pointed out some things that are born of decades of filming experience, and you turned it into a personal attack. I don't equate those two things.

In any case, I don't think there's any point in continuing in this discussion because I'm not all that interested in seeing my words get twisted and tangentialized onto some other subject that I wasn't even discussing. Signing off.
 
maranfilms said:
I have to agree with Barry on this. The camera is already behind schedule, in fact I thought it was suppose to be ready to sale last summer.( this is from memory, so I may be off) Either way, get the damn camera built, if it sales, then make some accessories people might buy. It just makes no sense to spend even a day on anything but the camera at this point. I imagine this is close to the reason several people I know pulled their orders, they didn't feel the company was doing what it needed to get it in to the hands of the investors.
Click to expand...

The camera and the lenses are in the hands of two separate partner companies, Lenso for the camera and Kish for the lenses. Neither has any effect on the other's schedule.
The camera prototype is complete and functional at this point undergoing sensor calibration and firmware tweaks. The first prototype lens set is finished and in hand.
 
pitstain said:
So your point Barry is that you said nothing negative about the camera - you only said negative things about the people making the camera.
Things like they know nothing about optics, or how lenses work, they are ill-informed, their ideas are terrible, ridiculous and they should kill these ideas immediately. Sounds like pep talk to me :-)

The point of my post was to direct your exact negative words about the people and ideas of the Digital Bolex Crew onto you - so that you can see what being negative looks like.

You can say you never said anything negative about the camera itself - or the colors of the rainbow - but my allegation is exact. I used your own words to do so.
Click to expand...

No it is not exact...Barry never said the ideas plural were a bad idea, he was an early backer of those ideas. He also never said they should kill ideas plural immediately or that they were ill informed and ridiculous as a group. He said the LENSES were a bad idea and that Joe's statement about optics shows that he doesn't understand how they work. His comments were directed towards these fixed aperture lenses and how building such lenses is a distraction an up and coming camera maker doesn't need to indulge in. His comments were not condemning DBolex, they were merely pointing out the idea of fixed aperture lenses and the time spent on making them is not a great idea at all.

From my point of view, the camera section is pretty damn cool. I think the better option for lenses will end up being EBAY specials and private market/small business sales.
 
Last edited:
pulpfiction007 said:
...He said the LENSES were a bad idea and that Joe's statement about optics shows that he doesn't understand how they work.
Click to expand...

Along with this greater depth of field you also get greater spatial distortion, meaning things in the background look further away from the things in the foreground.

If you mean the above statement what is wrong or inaccurate about it? The longer the focal length of a lens, the more it compresses distance perspective. For the same field of view, s16mm lenses will have significantly shorter focal lengths and produce images with a different depth perspective and deeper DOF character compared to S35 or full frame lenses.
 
This is quite sad. I point out to you, Barry, that you are being negative by saying that the DBolex crew "know nothing about optics, or how lenses work, they are ill-informed, their ideas are terrible, ridiculous, and they should kill these ideas immediately" and you categorize it as a personal attack against you?

You can re-read your own posts on the subject - No one here is your secretary. Sheesh.
 
When you have deep depth of field you don't have the separation as noted above. Deep depth of field is deep depth of field...end of story.
 
pulpfiction007 said:
When you have deep depth of field you don't have the separation as noted above. Deep depth of field is deep depth of field...end of story.
Click to expand...

Not true. DOF and spatial perspective are two completely distinct optical characteristics. If you are at infinity focus on a 15mm lens vs a 50mm lens, objects in the background will look farther away on the 15mm lens. If you are at say f5.6 on the 50mm lens vs f2.8 on the 15mm lens, you will have about the same DOF, but objects in the background will still look smaller and farther away than the 50mm.
 
Razz16mm said:
For the same field of view, s16mm lenses will have significantly shorter focal lengths and produce images with a different depth perspective and deeper DOF character compared to S35 or full frame lenses.
Click to expand...

You are right about the DOF, but wrong about "depth perspective". This is a commonly held misconception, but it is still just untrue.

Camera position determines perspective, not sensor size nor lens.
 
Okay, back in only to answer this question because it was specifically directed at me...
Razz16mm said:
Along with this greater depth of field you also get greater spatial distortion, meaning things in the background look further away from the things in the foreground.

If you mean the above statement what is wrong or inaccurate about it?
Click to expand...
The inaccuracy is what's inaccurate about it. It's implying that you're going to see distorted perspective, which just isn't true.

For the same field of view, s16mm lenses will have significantly shorter focal lengths and produce images with a different depth perspective and deeper DOF character compared to S35 or full frame lenses.
Click to expand...
They will have shorter focal lengths to deliver the same field of view, and they will have different DOF, but if the camera is in the exact same position and the lens is showing the same field of view, then the spatial rendering and perspective will be identical.

Re-read the statement -- it doesn't say anything about DOF, it says that the perspective will be different. Perspective is a function of where the camera is placed in relation to the subject, not a function of the focal length of the lens. If it was, every 1/6" camcorder out there with their 1.5mm lenses should be producing outlandish fisheye shots, right? But they don't. Because perspective isn't a property of the lens or its focal length (unless you're talking about a purpose-built fisheye); perspective is based on where the camera is in relation to the subject.

If you put a 50mm lens on a S35 camera, and a 25mm lens on an S16 camera, and position them on exactly the same tripod position, they will deliver identical field of view, identical perspective, and -- if you compensate with the iris for the focal length difference, you can make them look identical in terms of DOF too.
 
That's what I mean by my statement...the only thing you get inherently with S16 vs S35 at the same lens aperture and focal length (I don't mean made to match....I mean inherently at the same exact same focal length and aperture settings) is deeper dof and a narrower fov. Take the same pic with a 7D and a GH2....both at 20mm, both at 2.8. The 7D will show more in the frame and the dof will be shallower. That is all that will be different. Magic dust will not make the GH2 render the space any different, nor will the DBolex.
 
He WALKED closer to get the effect he was after. That just proves Barry/Nothings point. Zooming in didn't change anything by itself perspective wise...walking closer and changing the distance from the subject did change things immensely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top