HPX170 with CINEMEK G35

Huy Vu,

Sounds like you guys had a producing problem. I don't know of any producer that would put 15k in a budget for equipment if he only had a five person crew to handle it. And you are right, simple is better, but you still need the correct tools to for the job and sometimes those tools cost a little bit of money.
 
oh and I would like to add: Some people need to stop down further than to 5.6 or want to use faster shutter speeds....
 
Cordvision,

I am not bashing all other adapters. I just would not trust one on set. I don't like the idea of relying on a little cheap motor. I would hate to stall a production because of a problem like that. The other adapters seem to work fine for people. like i said before, its the "indian" not the "arrow". As for the RED. I shoot the RED a lot, but that is only on shows that can afford it. There is no reason to compare the RED to a camera with an adapter. Those are two different leagues.
 
cordvision said:
oh and I would like to add: Some people need to stop down further than to 5.6 or want to use faster shutter speeds....
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that only the stopping down past 5.6 effects grain, not having a faster shutter speed (because it has no moving parts).
 
filmer1001 said:
There is no reason to compare the RED to a camera with an adapter. Those are two different leagues.
Click to expand...

I guess that is the point where I would disagree. Renting a RED camera can be pretty cheap these days. If you factor in the additional costs of a bigger lighting package, a bigger crew etc, I doubt that it makes such a big difference. Actually my friend initially planed on shooting with an adapter on the HVX, after doing the math he went with the RED. He got a complete red package for cheap because the film industry is "running slow" in LA at the moment...
 
of course if you have a deal on the RED it is cheaper. But the going rate for a full red package not including lenses is around $1200 a day. Regardless, if you have the money the RED the better choice than any adapter.
 
jstunzi,

I borrowed the Letus Extreme for a test a couple times and I have used the PS back in 05. But I am very new to the whole adapter thing. I judge off what works the best for me (look, feel, manufacturing, etc.) which happens to be the G35. I started out in Film so that is what I am used to even though I have shot with the F900, Varicam, RED a handfull of times as well. I started out in photography then moved into motion picture side. I worked on the Drew Carey show when i was 16 or 17 and that kind of got me started. I went the the LA film school in 04 (when it was super small) and majored in cinematography. I have been working and shooting ever since from small indie stuff to major motion pictures. I was a preview tech for DP Jimmy Muro on Rush Hour 3 (didn't get preview tech credit cause im not in the union. got camera pa. credit ahha) and just finished a Super16mm Surf Documentary called "Beneath the Surface" (www.beneaththesurfacethemovie.com). thats about it for me. just trying to keep working and getting better.
 
"bokeh rendition" and more importantly the texture of the image are both determined by the diffusion of the GG. the more diffusion, the more filmic the texture and "Bokeh rendition". but also the more diffusion the more lightloss you get...

for me at least, the look of the image takes precedence over the light loss. and this is why the G35 is awesome. cinemek understand this.
 
filmer1001 said:
you still need the correct tools to for the job and sometimes those tools cost a little bit of money.
Click to expand...

Exactly, the right tool for the right job. I've encounter plenty of situations where I couldn't set up ANY lights because there wasn't enough time, or there wasn't enough space or power, or I was traveling light and couldn't bring in the big stuff. In an ideal world, you have unlimited time and the perfect location, but a lot of times things are what they are and you just need to grab the shot. If my adapter which loses .5 stop is going to allow me to get a usable image, and another adapter that loses 1.5 stops will not, guess which one is the right tool for the job? You're trying to say that one adapter fits all and that we should adapt to the tool instead of picking the right one for the situation at hand.

And before you start saying that without proper lighting you can't get a "film look," take a look at this teaser by Zak Forsman. There are great shots inside a train station at :56 and again at 2:47. They were taken with the Brevis, a very light efficient adapter, and in that situation a slower adapter would never have gotten the shot.

http://vimeo.com/453020

Another analogy is in camera choice. I can use a big broadcast camera for ENG, and that'll be "best." but if a tiny handicam is going to net me less attention and allow me to get the shot, then the "best" option isn't really best now is it?
 
Huy Vu,

You seem to have it all figured out so I don't know why you keep writing these long postings trying to prove your point. Of course you can get great images with other adapters. Its not the ADAPTER who makes a great image. And if you think that I cant get certain shots with the G35 that is fine. I will show you. Lastly, the DP (DIRECTOR of photography) has the choice of what tool he is going to need to get what the director wants. I as a DP always choose what will LOOK the best even if I loose a stop of and a half of light. Its all personal choice Huy. Hope you make some great stuff. Good Luck

dana

www.danamorrisphoto.com
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top