DoF Too Deep?

You know, this is pretty funny, because though I won't be shooting in many overly lowlight conditions AFTER this, I have a 15 min short coming up, half of which takes place outdoors in pasadena (a city) at night. I am hoping there will be some light coming from street/window lights etc. Some of these shots also take place on a roof. So, it will be interesting to see how it turns out I guess...

I like the idea of having a slower zoom and then one or two faster primes. Still looking into lenses. As far as stability, I've got a nice rig in the works.
 
Kholi said:
I'm about to run out and pick up a 28-300/3.5~6.5 Tamron VC Zoom for the MKii. It'll probably be the lens I use on this project for everything unless I get into a low light situation that can benefit from a wider aperture.
Click to expand...

Hey Kholi, long time listener / first time caller j/k. Please let me know your experience with the Tamron all-in-one zoom (everyday shooting), versus your sigma and contax zeiss primes. I guess you'll still be rocking the 5D Mark IIs with the GH1s and your R1?
 
allantab said:
Hey Kholi, long time listener / first time caller j/k. Please let me know your experience with the Tamron all-in-one zoom (everyday shooting), versus your sigma and contax zeiss primes. I guess you'll still be rocking the 5D Mark IIs with the GH1s and your R1?
Click to expand...

Hey allantab,

I actually skipped the Tamron Zoom. I got there, started thinking and just had to pass on it. The more I thought about how to make the MKii work, the less interested I became in it in general. So, while I'd STILL suggest everyone get an IS Zoom for everyday shooting, I didn't pick one up myself.

Instead, I used the RED on both jobs and just cut them an incredible rate to make up for quoting them the MKii's rate first. Shhhhh. The RED's rolling shutter is a non-issue for me at this point, the weight allows me to handheld very smoothly even @ 200mm focal lengths and I know I won't be fighting aliasing or anything else-- aka worrying myself to death instead of focusing on getting the best shots freely-- when I used them. Just had to put up with the weight, but I got the camera down to abotu 7lbs in my hand with the extra weight on my back. =D No follow Focus. Only the top handle, LCD, Nikon Zoom. The Drive and Battery were on my back.

In the end, I'll just have a pair of GH1's and the RED ONE.

Entity... I did want to shows you something about DOF and TOO DEEP, along with Stopping down...

RED @ 4K, 5500 Manual WB, 0 Tint, Nikon 80-200/4 @ 80/4 (I'll explain why so slow), ISO 400, REC709 Color Space, very very soft curve applied in REDAlert to boost contrast to [my] tastes and brighten highlights to just below overexposure. They shold be around 80 or so.

CoffeeMagazine.jpg



There are only a few things I wanted to point out and how they would've changed had I gone ahead and used the MKii instead of the RED.

A. When you start stopping glass down, you're not just changing the DOF, but you're changing the aesthetic as well. This specific zoom wide open is actually pretty bad with CA, notice it on the cup where it's turning a bit purple. That's fine with me, but the main things to point out are
...-- The out of focus highlights and areas (bokeh) are rendered very pleasantly. Specifically the foreground objects and the bright, perfect circle off of the edge of the coffee cup. Now, had I gone with the MKii, the only way to get that would have been to use something like an F8 or F11 zoom (max aperture) OR the same F4 with ND's. However, the DOF would have been dramatically different. Most of what you can see in the image and clearly discern (magazine, cup, back wall, hair ) would have fallen away due to the thin DOF even at F4. Articles like the Magazine and Coffee cup are actually VERY important bits of information that tell the viewer, or at least gives the viewer an idea of, what time of day it is or what's going on. So had those been lost, then that's information that's lost when you're trying to convey a message without words in moving images. For stills, it's different. You have time to sit and stare to put it together, that's my thought anyway.

This is also why I used the F4 zoom instead of the 2.8 on the camera. I didn't want it to be hyper shallow. I did want a cinematic FOV and DOF which the RED gives, the RED is also pretty quick in all rights so an F4 with this lighting setup (Opal, Floppies, Mirror boards and one Kino for hair) was PLENTY. The ISO 400 was used to net the most highlight retention for this type of scene, instead of 320 or 250.

B. The second reason was just what's been feared: pulling focus with thin DOF. So even if I wanted to use the MKii and NDs, I still would have had to pull focus while being handheld here. And this wasn't a static scene. A guy sneaks up behind her and they get into a play fight. My job is to track small bits and pieces while zooming in and out, hands, noses, lips, then I might zoom out to the wide end (80mm) to frame torso's and interaction.

Pulling focus on a Full Frame sensor at a time like this, where it's tough to go back and get natural repeated performances, could have killed me. Or, killed the footage or a good shot, then the people who hired me would've killed me.

So, while it's totally possible to stop down a lens to control your DOF, there are other things to consider. I agree with Pappas when he says that Academy FOV was chosen as the standard because it met right there in the middle of everything. It's very easy to control with practice and you still get a very nice FOV and DOF out of your glass.

This isnt' an MKii versus anything post, just about DOF and how Full Frame and working around to match Academy aesthetics.
 
Seeing as how I'm cropping my MKII footage to 1720x720 I'm deepening my DOF slightly yeah?
Also using an anamorphic adapter deepens DOF too so I might end up with something like red/GH1 DOF on a full frame sensor.
 
That's what Daniel L has been proposing and it makes sense. Again, so long as you frame for it of course.
 
Did some testing last night with my broken panny anamorphic adapter. I can go down to a 24mm prime (18mm equivalent with adapter) with minimal vignetting after the 1720 crop. no vignetting with a 28mm. no vstavision all scope baby!
 
It's got its uses. Special effects shots can do well with it. Honestly, that entire video looks greenscreened because the background is so indistinguishable but some may like and want that. No big deal.

Was just showing Entity what may or may not happen depending on circumstances with both.
 
Kholi,
With all due respect... You are making up a hypothetical scenario, a bunch of "what ifs" and feeding them to us as fact. The only fact is that you did not use the 5D. You don't know what would of happened in reality. You never encountered any of the problems you mentioned, they are based on nothing but assumptions. Besides, there are a lot of other great reasons for why you should use the RED if you have the chance.

Look, people have been shooting narrative work with the 5D for a long time. It works fine, just take the Ghost Whisperer web series for example. If so many people can make it work there is nothing wrong with it. Sure, it may not be right for you. You have made this clear many .. MANY times. I understand, that's OK. However, I don't think anybody should be discouraged. Advising it as too difficult or impractical is misleading. It's certainly not.

Kholi said:
I agree with Pappas when he says that Academy FOV was chosen as the standard because it met right there in the middle of everything. It's very easy to control with practice and you still get a very nice FOV and DOF out of your glass.
Click to expand...
There were a number of reasons why Academy was adapted, and none of them had anything to do with depth of field or field of view.
 
Daniel L. said:
Kholi,
With all due respect... You are making up a hypothetical scenario, a bunch of "what ifs" and feeding them to us as fact. The only fact is that you did not use the 5D. You don't know what would of happened in reality. You never encountered any of the problems you mentioned, they are based on nothing but assumptions. Besides, there are a lot of other great reasons for why you should use the RED if you have the chance.
Click to expand...

Kay Daniel, as I already knew you'd be RIGHT on the heels of this post, I'm still going to respond, but briefly:

Fact: Stopping a lens down means affecting Bokeh and OOF Areas. Aperture blades create different shapes create different effects on image. This is only one of MANY different anomalies. Do you think this is not a fact?

Fact: You need to employ deeper stops than F5.6 to achieve a similar DOF of the image I just showed and/or move to an alternate lens, completely changing the image characteristics. Do you not think this is fact?

Fact: It is definitely much more difficult to achieve accurate focus on a Full Frame Video Acquisition tool than one of a Smaller Frame (S35). Do you not think this is fact?

Fact: I never once said "Do not do this" in my post. It hasn't been edited, please go back and find where I said "no". I simply provided a point of view from both sides of the fence, with FOUNDED EXPERIENCE, which is pretty rare around here.

I responded to the last person in this thread who specifically addressed me, I answered his question. I also went back and replied to Entity with whom I've shared PMs with on advice.

Look, people have been shooting narrative work with the 5D for a long time. It works fine, just take the Ghost Whisperer web series for example. If so many people can make it work there is nothing wrong with it. Sure, it may not be right for you. You have made this clear many .. MANY times. I understand, that's OK. However, I don't think anybody should be discouraged. Advising it as too difficult or impractical is misleading. It's certainly not.


There were a number of reasons why Academy was adapted, and none of them had anything to do with depth of field or field of view.
Click to expand...
It IS difficult. I never said IMPRACTICAL. Thanks for, once again, proving how hard it is for people to follow words to exacts. You let me know when I've ever called it impractical.

I really don't care about who's shooting a web series with the MKii. Nobody even mentioned what you're talking about here so it's completely off topic. It has NOTHING to do with what I posted, however, I surely won't attempt to say why you keep hovering.

Instead, I'm going to ask this: Have you bothered to show anyone your efforts from the MKii? I see you linking to everyone else's footage, claiming that Focusing is easy etc yadda plus whatever, but where is YOUR footage from YOUR camera? Where's the handheld stuff that's not hyper-shallow? Where's the stuff where you're floating and pulling focus with as much ease as you claim? Why don't you ENCOURAGE (if you consider others discouraging) with your footage?

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I was not going to change anything, but I do already regret posting that... I'm not looking for a fight, I'm not stalking you, or trying to disrespect or anger you.

This is not personal. All I mean to say is that people should be encouraged to experiment and try things for themselves.
 
Sometimes people can't experiment and try for themselves. That's why those who have should try to be as unbiased and fair as possible and factor EVERYTHING, not just what benefits them.

Same time, you don't see me battling Pepster's posts on the RED when he has NO idea what the hell he's talking about. Dude's never even seen a RED.

Lullz.
 
I don't know who Pepster is...

I do have some comments but will restrain myself. It would just take this discussion to a bad place. I made my point so I will leave it at that.

Who knows, maybe you are right. Maybe the shoot would have been more complicated. It would have been interesting if you had the 5D there as at least a B cam. I would have used the RED myself no question just based on its image superiority.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Kholi is discouraging anyone it's just not for him but he might think differently if he didn't have a red. The GH1 is almost certainly easier as an acquisition tool but is let down by it's codec but I'm still seriously considering getting one to compliment my MKII.
 
I dunno, I think there are different tools for different jobs. Kholi's reasons for choosing Red over 5D make sense. I don't think it's a matter of not for him, between Red and 5D for the job described I would take Red. It would be good if one person's choice weren't taken as a personal attack on a camera. Tools people, these are all just tools. As I said before it's better to get as many perspectives as possible.
 
Fact: It is definitely much more difficult to achieve accurate focus on a Full Frame Video Acquisition tool than one of a Smaller Frame (S35). Do you not think this is fact?
Click to expand...

I would respectfully disagree IF one is skilled at focus and knows hyperfocal distances of each lens/aperture setting. If you know the hyperfocal distance you simply use the information to get everything in focus you need to keep in focus. Everything within your hyperfocal distance chosen will remain in focus, it's a matter of physics. A smaller frame sensor inheritently has a deeper DOF at a given aperture, but that does not mean it is any more difficult to shoot everything in focus with a full frame knowing the hyperfocal range of your particular shot. You have less range to work with at a given aperture, but it's not 'difficult'. If you're shooting full frame wide-open with a very shallow DOF you just know your range is very limited. But it's an option you don't even have with a smaller sensor. With the right quality lens you can stop down a lens a couple more f-stops for the desired DOF and still get good bokeh and get you in line with a smaller sensor. No?
 
Daniel I'll second your post. :kali:

And Issac really Red vs the 5D of course you'd choose the Red. That wasn't Kholi's point. His point was to point out how yet again FF is a poor choice for the various reasons listed. Why are we even talking about Red and the 5D.

Not that Kholi doesn't have his facts straight just that his line of reasoning is not actually fact even though it is presented as such. He's got his own opinions that's for sure. Unfortunately using his line of reasoning I should be posting that everyone in the DSLR forum is crazy because an EX1 is far better than all of these large sensor DSLRs. You still have some DOF and it's just so much easier to focus. Because.

FACT: It's far easier to focus an EX1 than it is a GH1. Of course this statement is true but does it make any sense to anybody here besides Kholi when everyone else will just stop down their lens or use a wider lens in order to CONTROL DOF when they are in a situation that requires it? Oh but it's the OOF highlights we have to worry about now. Hey, now that's craft and dedication to it. You're a better shooter than I am. And I'm really looking forward to seeing some great 5D footage from you Kholi. Please post some of your work for all of to see from your 5D set-up. I'd like to learn and study your perfectly composed OOF highlights and bokeh.

But hey Kholi doesn't care about CA so if you see that don't worry about it. That's no big deal. Again, all sarcasm aside, I'll respect the opinion because I know you know what you're talking about Kholi, but we're on the bleeding edge here and nobody is the final authority. Because what was fact can change. Things you never should do one day might be the thing to do. Using your facts I'd just have to go back to my 1/3" HDV camera because it's easier to focus. In fact, most of us are in fact here for the challenge and are trying to do something new. How many broadcast ENG guys think we're ignoring all the facts by shooting with a DSLR? All of their criticisms of this whole VDSLR idea would be facts but it wouldn't change the truth that I see when I watch the recorded images.

If we all were so concerned with the OOF highlights created by slower lenses you would think photographers would be buying up these lenses so they could better control their images. Yet every photographer I know all want lenses as fast as they can afford because they just stop down when they want less DOF or choose to use a wider lens. Now I bring up photographers because they have been shooting FF for a really long time.

Did you hear Red is going to create a FF scarlet? And if fact it's that version that's due to release first! Why in the hell would they do that when clearly FF is such a downer? What about the Epic 617? Nope clearly way to much FOV and DOF.

FF fact:

Larger sensor = more light to record = faster camera. The reason to shoot FF is because it's faster. And on your no budget feature you'll be able to light entire scenes with practicals if you have to. Yes focus will be tough but you can do it. Just like we did on film adapters - which could shoot FF and many people did shoot FF without even knowing it. That means back in the day you were focusing FF, had to shoot wide open and still had to light the hell out of the shoot. Now you can go with the most basic of light kits if that's all you've got (if you have more please use it), can actually choose an F-stop based on how much DOF you want and still have room to breath. Because I've had this conversation in the past with my gaffer.

"All the lights are on?"

"Yeah, set's lit."

"Man, it's still dark and I'm all the way open on my lens and the camera and +6 on the gain."

I found some footage today that I shot way back with the 5D. It's all very handheld and pretty shaky which also equals jello. With a simple shoulder mount, however, this set-up produces very stable video with no jello. For handheld you need to get your hands off the camera. Even the 5D with the battery grip is just not heavy enough nor long enough to dull your natural vibrations. But putting the camera on a simple shoulder set-up elongates the rig and creates a completely useable handheld set-up. You can do the shoot from the hip hold just like you did with any HVX or DVX or whatever you used in the past, or low to the ground, or pin it into your gut and allow your body to help (use this one a lot for weddings.) Works just fine. If you want longer get an IS lens. Or Pentax could convince Canon and Nikon to incorporate IS into the camera body itself like the K7 and all lenses would instantly have IS.

The image quality makes all the workarounds worth it with the 5D. It's the best image money can buy at $2700.

Oh and here's the video.

http://www.vimeo.com/5299258
 
First of all, Kholi never said the 5D was a "poor" choice for this job. He never used the word poor anywhere in his post. What he did do was state reasons why full frame and the 5D was the wrong tool for this job. That's all he did. Your experience might be different and that's fine, but getting worked up about it doesn't make his experience any different. If you can pull focus handheld at an f1.4 more power to you.
 
I believe Kholi pulls his own focus, on the barrel no less. FF35mm is not for him, as I think he's mostly trying to do narrative work. It's probably not the right tool for what he has available to work with.

As a DP and focus puller, I've shot on 35mm academy and super 35 often at night. You usually don't have the option to shoot at a 5.6 or greater to increase your depth of field. Your generator only puts out so many amps, your lighting units only 2Ks, etc. you want your ambient lights to play or your director wants to see into the city nightscape - there's a whole lot of reasons why you end up shooting between a T1.4 and a T4, on top of the fact that many lenses like the Ultraprimes are optima between T2.8 and T5.6. I dont think the Canon 5D even with its increased sensitivity will gain you more than a real stop.

Now couple that with actors who are given the freedom by the director to move and not rigidly stay to their marks, and you have a difficult scenario pulling focus and staying on them with anything longer than a 50mm. You need a practiced camera crew to achieve focus under those circumstances. Something a lot of you may not have on low to no budgets.

In 35mm, for dramatic shoots, you almost never use hyperfocal distance calculations to get your depth of field. Sure on HD, when you're shooting wide with a 8mm then maybe hyperfocal distance comes into play. The only lens which you might be considering what hyperfocal can do for you is the 18mm in Academy, and in that case it's surely not on a single or medium but on a master wide. And thats just one type of shot in the sequence.

I'm not knocking the 5D at all! I'm looking forward to playing with the 5Dmk2 myself - in discussions with directors as to what their budget will allow - the RED or the 5Dmk2. But I can understand that the 5D is not for everybody's shooting situation, especially if you are pulling your own focus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top