I think adaptors are still the best bet.

it's all about preference.. you know subjective taste.. no point in getting riled up everyone.. Some people like the look of adapter footage and some like dslr better.. nothing wrong about praising the 35mm adapter in the 35mm adapter section of this forum.
 
If everybody here believes it's a no contest and that DSLR wins then there's no point in even keeping this forum open.
 
Last edited:
kodjo said:
If everybody here believes it's a no contest and that DSLR wins then there's no point in even keeping this forum open.
Click to expand...

wow man. like i had no problem with any of what you said till now.

Use what you like bro. I gave up on doing client work last year and just rent out but I mean it's cause I realize I'm not too patient with people. Client doesn't have to know. It's our job.

this forum (as cheesy as i may sound but it's true) keeps me going. I have hell in beirut cause people here have tons more to worry about than the movie situation. But still man, I get discouraged all the time, and then I get on here and just read. I've got faces made up in my head for everyone and all.

You got some really pleasant people here trying to have a talk with you man. I thought everyone was kinda harsh at your first post, cause it interested me. But don't bash the forum man.

DSLR's are a first gen product. The nature and tradition of film (at least a lot of it) depends on the technology. the tech back then defines the standard now, and whether we like it or not, these rules change. that's art.

And the greatest contribution DSLRs are making is that they're putting these rules into question.

On the point of doing whatever you want, it's like drawing. You don't need a sheet of Arches every time. You don't need silver point. just draw man.

I usually don't chime in on this, but i'll stand up for anything it's dvxuser.

so to answer your statement, if any conclusion is so hastily reached it is a reason if not the very reason to keep the forum open not closed.

Anger sucks. Ask me. You don't look good at all when it's got you.

Go shoot man. You'll feel great. Shoot whatever you like.

I'm not being a douche, and really like the debate of the intrinsic quality of a material contributing to an aesthetic, it was a smart point you brought to the table, but do not.. bash... this place. I do not have the luxury of a comfortable community in lebanon. I can't ask anyone anything, if anything they ask me. This is the first place I go.

Respect that man.
 
kodjo said:
If everybody here believes it's a no contest and that DSLR wins then there's no point in even keeping this forum open.
Click to expand...

My personal POV is that this forum doesn't exist to compete with the DSLR forum at all!

I think this forum exists to share/trade the knowledge/experience of adapter users, and that's nothing to do with an open dispute of what system is best!!!!!
 
Well put.

In the end, it's more about what you do with the tools than what tools you are using.
 
Drew Ott said:
I find shooting weddings much faster with DSLRs. When you have a bunch of DSLRs, you can very quickly bounce from accessory to accessory (slider, crane, steadicam, tripod, monopod) and get all the shots you need. This is just in my experience. For certain narrative situations, a traditional video camera is certainly faster.

The 5D now has histogram since the 24p firmware update. It goes away while recording but that's not much of an issue in my opinion/experience. There's no need to take a still shot to check exposure.
Click to expand...

The problem for em with the 5D is very poor skin texture - the moire line-skipping affects the size of pores and other skin defects. I would imagine this would not be great for a bride. What i like about a GOOD 35mm adapter is that with a good video camera, it is reliable - just keep it clean and back focused, and it works. to em worrying about the codec, the aliasing, the etc. is a lot of worry indeed.
 
greymog said:
wow man. like i had no problem with any of what you said till now.

Use what you like bro. I gave up on doing client work last year and just rent out but I mean it's cause I realize I'm not too patient with people. Client doesn't have to know. It's our job.

this forum (as cheesy as i may sound but it's true) keeps me going. I have hell in beirut cause people here have tons more to worry about than the movie situation. But still man, I get discouraged all the time, and then I get on here and just read. I've got faces made up in my head for everyone and all.

You got some really pleasant people here trying to have a talk with you man. I thought everyone was kinda harsh at your first post, cause it interested me. But don't bash the forum man.

DSLR's are a first gen product. The nature and tradition of film (at least a lot of it) depends on the technology. the tech back then defines the standard now, and whether we like it or not, these rules change. that's art.

And the greatest contribution DSLRs are making is that they're putting these rules into question.

On the point of doing whatever you want, it's like drawing. You don't need a sheet of Arches every time. You don't need silver point. just draw man.

I usually don't chime in on this, but i'll stand up for anything it's dvxuser.

so to answer your statement, if any conclusion is so hastily reached it is a reason if not the very reason to keep the forum open not closed.

Anger sucks. Ask me. You don't look good at all when it's got you.

Go shoot man. You'll feel great. Shoot whatever you like.

I'm not being a douche, and really like the debate of the intrinsic quality of a material contributing to an aesthetic, it was a smart point you brought to the table, but do not.. bash... this place. I do not have the luxury of a comfortable community in lebanon. I can't ask anyone anything, if anything they ask me. This is the first place I go.

Respect that man.
Click to expand...

Cool post.
 
Giuseppe Pugliese said:
I have to intervene here, but it really sounds like you've never actually seen raw footage from a higher end camera, or DSLR camera blowup up vs. a 35mm adapter footage blown up to film... You're getting mad at a moderator for giving you real world info ....

Fact is you are speaking from the stand point of one person, and this is a form for helping others, if you have nothing useful to contribute there's really no reason for you to be posting on here.

Your fact's are not backed up by anything other than your non-caring about anyone else but yourselves- opinion. That helps no one on here.

The things you are talking about are completely backwards... If you blow up to film, you are going to see a lot more problems with an adapter footage than say a DSLR.

Now if you do your research on me, I pretty much HATE the use of DSLR's but on this, using facts I will have to side against you and with DSLR's. Having DSLR footage blown up to film projected, or projected digitally produces way nicer results than through a ground glass type device. The image is too soft when viewing ground glass adapters (and you keep spelling adapter wrong, its not "adaptor"...

I stand up for teaching people proper techniques and information. This is not Wikipedia, facts here matter, some people view this everyday as their important source for information and education to questions that cant be answered in other places.

I suggest you either respect this Form and the people who run it, and write for it every day. or start your own form considering, you really don't care about others opinions (as for your statement earlier about not caring about clients. and considering most of the people on here eventually have clients and or want to have clients in the future, your statements don't matter to us at all.) What you may want to do if you would like to have others view your opinions and not comment on them, is start your own blog.

This site is for helping others. Either contribute accurate or artistic information, and chime in when others respond with an opposition , in a proper manor, or don't post at all.

MY OPINION -

P.S. The moderators are here to make sure you follow the rules, and you are not following the rules of the form, hence why he chimed in.
Click to expand...

Side by side in 1080p an Ex1 plus Redrock M2e beats a 5D in sharpness by a MILE, on a VERY BIG screen (we have a 2K 103" screen in the office). Some other adapters are pretty crappy, but, after all these years, not that one (and surely not some others as well).

I think it is important to remember that ALL in focus areas look wrong on a DSLR due to line skipping - at worst it will rainbow-moire, but at best it will look over-sharpened and weird. Maybe you don't care, but I see it and it bugs the hell out of me. Sand looks wrong, concrete looks wrong, skin looks wrong, hair looks wrong (and can moire in the wrong light - its' not just fabrics and bricks, it's what you least expect).

DSLR resolution is also pretty bad. Shooting charts proves this, but real world footage makes it plain to see.

I think it's great that people can shoot demo films for cheap, but 35mm adapters, while more expensive, are still the much better tool if your delivery is HD. Red, more expensive still (and heavier still) is far better.
 
Robert Ruffo said:
Side by side in 1080p an Ex1 plus Redrock M2e beats a 5D in sharpness by a MILE, on a VERY BIG screen (we have a 2K 103" screen in the office). Some other adapters are pretty crappy, but, after all these years, not that one (and surely not some others as well).

I think it is important to remember that ALL in focus areas look wrong on a DSLR due to line skipping - at worst it will rainbow-moire, but at best it will look over-sharpened and weird. Maybe you don't care, but I see it and it bugs the hell out of me. Sand looks wrong, concrete looks wrong, skin looks wrong, hair looks wrong (and can moire in the wrong light - its' not just fabrics and bricks, it's what you least expect).

DSLR resolution is also pretty bad. Shooting charts proves this, but real world footage makes it plain to see.

I think it's great that people can shoot demo films for cheap, but 35mm adapters, while more expensive, are still the much better tool if your delivery is HD. Red, more expensive still (and heavier still) is far better.
Click to expand...

I've felt the same bout the sharpness and the skin. skin looks glossy and way too slick.
 
Robert Ruffo said:
Cool post.
Click to expand...

Thank you. And good point about being a tech forum. I think everyone's point of story being king is just a big picture to keep in mind. But yeah it should be a given before the discussion.

I really liked the thread topic though it's a shame about the jabs and all. Made me think of holgas and what happens through a plastic lens. Not that I'm comparing quality, but the fact that the nature of the material that the light passes through or the mechanics of the system creates an aesthetic is to me, special.

We had an exercise in college where we had to alter an intrinsic and inate characteristic of an item to change our perception of it. First example would be to paint a perfectly good apple black and have everyone say its poisoned.

Thread topic just took me back there, it's why I read on.

I ahve never tried to use an adapter I'm new at this, I'm scared to try coz I'm lovin the DSLR's and don't wanna get off that wagon yet. Too much fun. :) I'll probably pick an adapter setup up when they're really called old. Age adds value for me.

Cheers all, I turned 29 today. Was a good aft with the family. My 5D blew up. Lotsa photos. Lotsa 'ooooh aaah it does video aaah'. Fun. :)
 
I've never tried to intercut DSLR and adaptor images. I may want to use DSLR for establishment shots and pick up shots and combine with the adaptor sequences. Is it a good idea to mix tools?
 
I've mixed/intercut HDSLR footage (GH1, 7D, 5DII) with footage from the HVX200, the HPX170 and the Sony EX1. Everything looked good. With a bit of color-tweaking, I think you can get good results.
 
Mixing tools is probably the greatest plus these things made possible. I do it all the time. Mixed media. A proper 2/3" inch sensor and codec to take the beating of an action scene, coupled with Full Frame for the emotional moment and the super wide, and a nice s35-sized aps-c sensor for the medium shots. For example. It's the beauty.

After two days of this thread I'm itching to try an adapter setup.
 
Hi.. I agree with opinion that dof adapter footage looks better than dslr footage.. i shoot music videos. and as dp i choose adapter for good budget, and 5d / 7d for low budget.. my argument is that for shooting real movies you need ton of light and i is very pleasurable to use ton of light.. another thing with dof adapeter futage we can make at least four very good cplor correction, while by dslr footage we hardly make one that looks good..
 
If you convert to cineform codec before color correcting should the two formats 'DSLR and 35Adaptor) not work out the same?
 
kodjo said:
If you convert to cineform codec before color correcting should the two formats 'DSLR and 35Adaptor) not work out the same?
Click to expand...

Not if the HD video camera has AVC-Intra 100 or even DVCPRO HD as a codec.
AVC-Intra is 100Mbps, 10-bit, 4:2:2, I-Frame, not 8-bit, 4:2:0, low bit-rate, Long GOP.
You can't get back gray scale or color resolution that wasn't recorded in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top