I don't understand?

renegadewill

renegadewill

Well-known member
I have been looking around and I see tons of people with 35mm adapters and no audio gear. If you only do music videos, that's plenty fine, but their shorts have amazing frame grabs but sound like a home video. I always hear that audio is around 70% of your image so why does everyone spend about the same price as a decent audio set up on an adapter when they have terrible audio?

Just wondering,
Will
 
Last edited:
my guess? they spent ~2500 for a camcorder that suppose to look like film and they are let down that 2500 didn't buy them the depth of field they wanted and they might think that that's the end all be all of what makes it look like film, so they dish out the money for it.

not saying that 35mm doesn't help the look, it really is a great portion of it plus you can shoot anything and it'll look like "THE BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY EVER" .
I plan on building one, not rich and gotz billz, but definately getting a mic before i do. this is just my humble opinion.
 
I plan on getting a mic before an adapter, you look on youtube with all these people using 35mm adapters and all of the videos they have posted are marked as tests, and there are the few people that use it for films.
 
ok, cool. So I'm not all by myself on this. And there are tons of people that just do test after test and never make a short. aahahaha, I never noticed that, but youre right.
 
Its true, why buy all the gear and not make a film? Sure you can test your camera but why put it on youtube to show the world that you can play with your DVX.
 
I don't care about 35mm adapters, I rather to upgrade my rig with better audio gear, lighting, etc.
DVX is a DVX and period!:furious3:
Just my two cents...
 
A 35mm adapter is a great tool. It is hands down the best investment I have made aside from my DVX itself.

That said, I spend a lot more time in post working with sound then I do on a picture-lock edit. Like, far and away more time on sound...
 
I bought the camera, I have three different mics, my next investment will be a nice matte box with rails then maybe in a year or two i'll look at an adaptor, right now i'm still learning the camera. If I had the adaptor,,,,,well lets just say it adds another dimension to worry about when your still trying to master the ones before it. My audio gear is top notch.
 
RED ya right, if I had $60000 to spend it wouldent be on a camera.

William Robinette I totally agree that the 35mm adapter is a tool and its a great tool at that. It all depends on what you want to do. Im not hating on people with adapters I WANT ONE!
 
I'm not hating on adapters at all. If I have about 2 grand I'd have one in a moment. My mond is blown by people who have them and are still running their on camera mic. If you are only a music video guy then it is completely fine, but when you can hear the guy focusing the cam on his audio track with really faint dialogue. It's just horrible. In my opinion sound is what makes your production like professional, not how short your depth of field is. More than half of them are going handheld that is so shaky even michael mann wouldn't approve.
 
renegadewill said:
I'm not hating on adapters at all. If I have about 2 grand I'd have one in a moment. My mond is blown by people who have them and are still running their on camera mic. If you are only a music video guy then it is completely fine, but when you can hear the guy focusing the cam on his audio track with really faint dialogue. It's just horrible. In my opinion sound is what makes your production like professional, not how short your depth of field is. More than half of them are going handheld that is so shaky even michael mann wouldn't approve.
Click to expand...

I absolutely second this... nobody here's hating the adapters, the issue is which accessory is first on the list.
 
Therein lies the problem with independent film makers. Image comes before everything else. It almost pains me to see so many people talking about the RED and how it will make their films so much better than everyone else's. Is it revolutionary? Yep, End all for everything? Not at all. Not even close.

It is all about the camera now-a-days. Yes, am I planning on upgrading cameras? Of course. However, I typically rent everything, finally in the market to buy. People forget how important a good script is, good lighting, great audio. Because the picture can look amazing - but if the sound is sub-par. As it typically is in most indie films, then there is a problem. There is much more than that Depth of Field. People forget that.
 
Mattykins said:
Therein lies the problem with independent film makers. Image comes before everything else. It almost pains me to see so many people talking about the RED and how it will make their films so much better than everyone else's. Is it revolutionary? Yep, End all for everything? Not at all. Not even close.

It is all about the camera now-a-days. Yes, am I planning on upgrading cameras? Of course. However, I typically rent everything, finally in the market to buy. People forget how important a good script is, good lighting, great audio. Because the picture can look amazing - but if the sound is sub-par. As it typically is in most indie films, then there is a problem. There is much more than that Depth of Field. People forget that.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why I will be getting more audio gear before I get an adapter. Unless I go DIY.

And really, the DVX is capable of some awesome DOF when it is wide open. Much better then the stock XL2 lens IMO. Oh, wait, the DVX is better then the XL2! My bad!
 
Same as wreck2. A lot of people make test videos, including myself when they get their adapter. I just assume people think the way I do when they get their adapter which is "I better learn how to use this as best as I can before I try to set something real up". I don't even record audio when I shoot with the adapter...not yet at least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top