DOP Test without adapter

Nice man. I don't see why people buy adapters. I mean yeh, sure you get more of it, but when I do my weddings, man, I get some nasty DOF shots. I will post some up when I start editing this wedding video. The DOF is so shallow. The further you are and the more you zoom, the more shallow depth of field you get. Just my two cents. Well good luck with your productions. Peace!

P.S. Was that actually him playing? Was that you playing? That was sweet stuff.
 
Actually, although you did get some nice DOF, with a 35mm adapter you would have really thrown that window and the backyard out of focus and the focus would have really concentrated on the piano player. But the 35mm adapter is just a tool to use for specific needs and it's not always needed. In the case of the piano player I think an adapter would have been useful to bring the viewer's eye to just the piano player without any distractions. Then again......that's all in the eye of the creator :)
Congrats on your first post and welcome!
 
Well, not only that, you can also get some nice wide shots, while still getting a shallow depth of field. With the DVX you are limited to pretty tight shots if you want to have shallow depth of field, but with a 35mm adapter you could get the entire piano if you wanted, and still have a much shallower depth of field. But like Marlene said, it's a tool.
Lucky, you would not want to use a DOF adapter for a wedding, at least not the whole thing, you would never get anything good. These adapters really are made for narrative work, and I must say, since starting to use one, it is hard to go back to shooting without.
 
the image still looks quite electronic to my eyes. A 35 mm adapter provides not only a nice DOF with a soft bokeh, but a soft picture overall which adds to the film experience for me.

Grain also actually. I enjoy some of the grain from the static adapters. Want one myself.
 
The piano in the background was added in post. It's not very practical to shoot the way I did for that shot because i had the zoom on full blast and i was really far away. But if for a specific shot you really want the DOP its nice to know that it's possible.
 
I was wondering about the DOP thing, but I just figured he was referring to a Director of Photography who would make the Dof shallow for him :)
 
The depth of field was pretty good, but maybe it was the actual camera's focusing - that was a little jerky and mechanical and almost too machine-like for me. Not saying it was bad, but I think that a 35 mm adaptor can work better for other shots, styles, and moods. It's all about what you want to achieve in the scene or in the shot. I think that if you tried the test again, and did the focusing slower and smoother, it might resemble the feel of 35mm. But it's a feeling, it's not something that can be described. It felt like video still, you know. But I'm glad to watch the test and see someone trying it out, instead of bragging about their 5 thousand dollar adaptor their dad bought them! You know, by the time you get the rig and evrything, it seems, at least budget-wise, that one could just bite the bullet and film in a higher format, with the mini-DV technology still at SD, and some HD, you've got one camera at a low price (to some) but the 35mm adaptors are very expensive and why not just jump and shoot 16mm or on the Varicam, if it is a short, or music video - you know?
 
The 35mm adapters aren't expensive at all. Where have you been shopping?
There is much more cost however, in shooting 16mm or Varicam or whatever format, not only in film costs, processing, telecine process etc, or the cost of working with a DVCPRO HD Tape format. Here is the other thing, once you buy all you need for your camera, you can do more than one shoot. If you were to spend the same on 16mm, well great, you have one short film, but if you spend it on your own camera and equipment, well now you can have lots of shorts, docs, features whatever. And if shot correctly, no one will ever know if it was shot on SD, HD, or film. To the average viewer, these things mean nothing. All they know is that they are looking at pretty pictures.
 
how tall are u tall are u tall enouth for a crane shot with out crane, liked the coor on the vid and thanx for sharing thought about getting an adapter but i say why seen to much good work on here with out one so im cool

peace n luv

Mark Dog
 
LuckyProducer said:
Nice man. I don't see why people buy adapters. I mean yeh, sure you get more of it, but when I do my weddings, man, I get some nasty DOF shots. I will post some up when I start editing this wedding video. The DOF is so shallow. The further you are and the more you zoom, the more shallow depth of field you get. Just my two cents. Well good luck with your productions. Peace!

P.S. Was that actually him playing? Was that you playing? That was sweet stuff.
Click to expand...
As someone said before, the adapters are more for narrative work. I don't know if you've done narrative work before, but if you had, you would know exactly why people buy them.
 
its also important to keep in mind to get the DOP from the stock DVX/HVX lens, you must zoom in and back up. Zooming in makes every little shake very visible (which shows up in this video). The focus ring on the DVX doesnt have the buttery viscosity that many 35mm SLR lenses have. To achieve this w/o an adapter one should use the camera on sticks and a rack focus to minimize vibrations from the users hand.
 
I was a little confused at that...I search DOP and came up with director of photography which most usually say DP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOP

or dioctyl phthalate lol.

or maybe im just ignorant.

I thought the angle of the shot could have been better. since the piano was open I think a high angle shot would have been better. just my measley 2 cents.
 
I'm 6'5" for whomever asked. Sorry about the whole DOP and DOF confusion. I meant to put DOF but for some reason I didn't. My interest is narratives so I'm hoping that over the next 6 months I'll be able to save up for an Adapter (I'm still in High School) because the advantages of using one are extremely clear when one sees the example footage. Thanks everyone for the comments.
 
I was really surprised to see that no one commented on the fact that long focal lengths shrink perspective. In the example footage it seems as if everything is squashed together because of the focal length of the zoomed lens whereas with a faster lens and shorter focal length you can still have shallow depth of field and maintain the seperation of foreground and background. Just something I was thinking about....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top