HPX 170 and DOF help?

B

breafilms

New member
Hello everyone,
I own a Panasonic HPX170. im happy with it , but it has a fixed wide angle lens, so
so there is not much you can do about DOF with out going in to huge expenses...
unless i am wrong, which i hope you guys can prove me.

here are my questions to the community.

what would be the most cost effective way to improve DOF somewhat significantly on the HPX170, without losing too much light?

I am working with a budget of around 1000 bucks here. I have done research and i am well aware of the costs of DOF adapters and lenses and rod systems etc.
I am coming here because im hoping to find another way i dont know about....

Thank you
 
You're not going to get a good rig for around $1k. The closest thing to $1k i can recommend would be the Cinemek G35 which is a great adapter, but with lenses it will set you back a decent amount more.

For shallow depth of field, I would zoom in all the way and open the lens as fast as it can go. Use ND filters to control light.
 
Yeah, I think Joe is pointing you in the right direction.

The free answer works if you can control your scene. Back the camera up fifteen to twenty feet from your subject, zoom in on your subject, and then manually focus on your subject. Bingo -- instant shallow focus that looks acceptable. You do want to have some space between your subject and the background -- the more space the more impressive it'll look.

I've used this trick more than a few times, and someone always thought it was shot with a 35mm lens adapter or a different camera.
 
Purchase a wide angle adapter and that'll help give you some room on the sides when you do the trick that AGMedia suggested.
 
Hi Brea,

There are several ways to get where you're trying to go. For under $1,000 you could probably pick up a used DOF adapter; I don't know what a Brevis is going for now in the used market but it's a quite small/lightweight adapter that you could probably use with a variety of lenses and not need rails. As long as you're using lighter-weight lenses you can probably skip the necessity of buying rails and all that. Without the flip adapter it'll render your images upside down, but the HPX170's LCD provides for the ability to flip the image for you.

Or, you could do as someone above suggested and sell the HPX170 and get an AF100, depending on what you could get for the 170 that might be about a $1,000 exchange -- plus lenses.

Or, you could just add an inexpensive DSLR to your HPX170. A T2i on ebay goes for about $650, and the GH1 is going for even less; add a couple of inexpensive lenses and you should be able to be set up for under $1,000 and then you'd have two cameras and can choose between them for when you need the strengths of each.
 
AGMedia said:
Yeah, I think Joe is pointing you in the right direction.

The free answer works if you can control your scene. Back the camera up fifteen to twenty feet from your subject, zoom in on your subject, and then manually focus on your subject. Bingo -- instant shallow focus that looks acceptable. You do want to have some space between your subject and the background -- the more space the more impressive it'll look.

I've used this trick more than a few times, and someone always thought it was shot with a 35mm lens adapter or a different camera.
Click to expand...

I have done this many times in the past as well with my HVX, this is a screen grab from an interview using the technique... to me this one really popped because the hills in the background were about a mile and a half away and the separation is very distinct.

int_frame.jpg
 
Nascency Chris said:
I have done this many times in the past as well with my HVX, this is a screen grab from an interview using the technique... to me this one really popped because the hills in the background were about a mile and a half away and the separation is very distinct.
Click to expand...

Great image, magnificent scenery, and I like the way you worked the sun as the key light.

But -- let's not scare the guy -- ten feet of separation from the subject to the background will work.
 
AGMedia said:
Great image, magnificent scenery, and I like the way you worked the sun as the key light.

But -- let's not scare the guy -- ten feet of separation from the subject to the background will work.
Click to expand...

lol, yes very true, short distances work just as well. I felt this was a good example though for someone just beginning to play with this technique as it could give them something to look for when setting up their framing, etc.

Lighting is actually one thing I am always unhappy with, as most of the work I had required me to travel (the above example was shot in Oregon and i am based in Atlanta) and shipping full kits was never in the budget, so I became real handy at using what I had available (ie ALOt of natural light lol). Thank you though for the kind words, this is actually the first of anything I have ever posted on this site because the pixel peepers scare the ever loving crap outta me...
 
AGMedia said:
But -- let's not scare the guy -- ten feet of separation from the subject to the background will work.
Click to expand...
Well... on an HPX170? It depends on how far you're zoomed in... at full telephoto and fully wide-open, yeah, maybe, but if you're on 4.5mm, there's pretty much no amount of separation that is going to get you the shallow DOF look that people are sometimes seeking.

brea, did you get a copy of The HVX and HPX Book when you bought your camera? If so, there's a whole chapter in there on DOF and what you can do to get the shallowest DOF possible out of an HPX170.
 
Nascency Chris said:
this is actually the first of anything I have ever posted on this site because the pixel peepers scare the ever loving crap outta me...
Click to expand...

I wouldn't sweat it. Hardly anyone will give you anything but praise about your footage (even undeserved) unless you title it something like "BEST FOOTAGE EVER! WORSHIP ME!" and then post crap.
 
Barry_Green said:
Well... on an HPX170? It depends on how far you're zoomed in... at full telephoto and fully wide-open, yeah, maybe, but if you're on 4.5mm, there's pretty much no amount of separation that is going to get you the shallow DOF look that people are sometimes seeking.

brea, did you get a copy of The HVX and HPX Book when you bought your camera? If so, there's a whole chapter in there on DOF and what you can do to get the shallowest DOF possible out of an HPX170.
Click to expand...


I actually do have a copy...funny, i thought i had read it front to back...I'll take another look :)
thanks!
PS: anybody had a shot to mess around with the AG AF-100 yet?
How does it compare to Lens adapters on an HPX170 in terms of quality and loss of light?
how many stops to i loose on a say brevis adapter, vs. straight up mounting a lens on the AF?
and how do the 3 1/3 chips compare to the 1 3/4 chip on the AF?
 
Hi,

Getting a good depth with a naked HPX170 can be quite tedious, what with standing a few metres from your subject and having such a long focal length that a gush of wind might shake the whole image. But when used right, I feel that the HPX170 delivers an overall better image than the AF100 or the DSLRs currently out there...

Here is a test I did some time back of the DoF of the HPX170...

 
my?illu said:
But when used right, I feel that the HPX170 delivers an overall better image than the AF100 or the DSLRs currently out there...
Click to expand...

That is always what happens when you use the right tool very, very well. It is also the case when someone with a bad tool, who knows how to use the tool, will make something better than someone with the best tool that doesn't know what they're doing.

I'll also add "Good DOF" does NOT equal "Shallow DOF." "Good DOF" depends on the shot, sometimes you want everything in focus, sometimes you don't. The better you understand this, the better your shooting will be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top