My Af100 vs 35mm adapter Ex1, can I get the AF as filmic?

M

Matt smith

Member
After playing with the AF100 (I'm still waiting for Barrys book for all the tips) Im a bit surprised that the ex1 setup looks much more filmic when screened directly from the camera onto my external monitor.. I'm using ZF zeiss primes and really want to know can I achieve the similar filmic look.

I do short films and was looking at selling the ex1 setup as it's just too big and the AF is perfect for pocket dolly/jib.

Is it just settings in the camera, grading in post, lenses, I'm not sure. Any advice would be great as I'm desperate to love the AF as my only camera
 
It's interesting; I'm directing a housing commercial next week and will probably use the EX1R and Letus Ultimate with Nikon/Zeiss primes. It just has a look that I really like for TVC's. Yes it needs more light, but it looks very nice with only a light grade. There's something in the archaic system of mirrors and spinning prisms that...well works. I don't think I will be using the EX1/Ultimate for much longer, but it works now and works very well.
 
We shot our last short with the EX-1, Letus and Nikon and it looks beautiful. As I wait for that AF100 I'd be happy with results that good. We were also able to bake in a really good look that needed very little treatment. From what I've seen so far here, I'm pretty excited about the possibilities of the AF100 and the extra light. I just wanted to chime in that, for us, that system has worked very well too.

Take a look at A Verse Before Dying and some of the other samples here. It's entirely possible to get a great film look. Try some of the settings recommended. It seems that the AF100 offers a lot of flexibility and is really growing on people who have had a chance to find their sweet spot.
 
Last edited:
hscully said:
We shot our last short with the EX-1, Letus and Nikon and it looks beautiful. As I wait for that AF100 I'd be happy with results that good. We were also able to bake in a really good look that needed very little treatment. From what I've seen so far here, I'm pretty excited about the possibilities of the AF100 and the extra light. I just wanted to chime in that, for us, that system has worked very well too.

Take a look at A Verse Before Dying and some of the other samples here. It's entirely possible to get a great film look. Try some of the settings recommended. It seems that the AF100 offers a lot of flexibility and is really growing on people who have had a chance to find their sweet spot.
Click to expand...

I agree the ex1 adapter setup is great, but looking at the sample footage that's what worried me as I wasn't seeing footage like that. Possibly the image is so clean compared to the adapter output and that's whats throwing me. I'm sure it is my lack of knowledge of the camera, thanks for the feedback.

Are you guys keeping your adapter setups with the AF100?
 
Sold my Letus and waiting for my AF100 to arrive. Though judging from only sample/test footage of the AF100, my current opinion, like yours, is that the Letus rig is slightly better in filmic quality. Waiting final judgement when I receive my AF100 and to fool around with settings.

However, with tremendous light loss and just the size and bulk of the thing, I hope I can say safely that the AF100 rig will be probably 1/3 the size and weight. I was shooting on an Amtrak train for 6 days and my Letus rig was basically as long as the corridors in the sleeper cars.

I also don't have to worry about locking down focus/zoom with gaffers tape :D
 
I still feel my best work was done on my XH-A1 + Letus combo. It created a wonderful, dirtied image that had instant character.

Of course, most of that was due to lighting and lens choice. These new cameras are very clean, but can surely create a lovely image. It's just different, and that's okay.
 
I have a set of old schneider Cine lenses and a PL adapter for the AF . THis combo = instant letus adapter look without the monkey motion of the adapter rig. Its all in the lenses guys.
 
Everyones definition of "filmic" is different. Personally I've never been able to get what I would consider a "filmic" look out of an EX1 or EX3 with or without an adapter. I don't use those camera's very often, so it's entirely possible I just couldn't find the right settings the few times I used them with adaptors. I alway preferred the Panasonic gammas over Sony's gammas myself, so to me you should be able to make it more "filmic", but it's all perspective personal preference.
 
I have been saying this all along. I thought people were so quick to sell of their adapters to run to dslrs and the af100. I know there's a good many comprimises, but there's an organic warm feel they provide the af100, or dslr's just can't touch. I thought the AF100 looks very videoish. Although if you throw on a promist, it may help knock down some of the sharpening. Thats what I did for my dslr. But yeah, I have a dslr, and still grab my dof adapter setup 90% of the time.
 
I could see a promist on the AF but am shocked anyone would put a promist on a DSLR as I imagine it would turn the image to mush. Haven't tried it though, so maybe it's a good look.

IF anyone is looking for a 35mm adapter, DM me, as I am selling my Letus Extreme with the EX-1 optimization kit.
 
maranfilms said:
I have been saying this all along. I thought people were so quick to sell of their adapters to run to dslrs and the af100. I know there's a good many comprimises, but there's an organic warm feel they provide the af100, or dslr's just can't touch. I thought the AF100 looks very videoish. Although if you throw on a promist, it may help knock down some of the sharpening. Thats what I did for my dslr. But yeah, I have a dslr, and still grab my dof adapter setup 90% of the time.
Click to expand...

This is true, the ground glass on adapter does soften the image a bit. The AF100 is sharp yet shallow DoP similar to a RED where as adapter footage is slightly soft. your idea about a promist filter should do the trick. Are you using 1/4 black promist?
 
I've used the HVX/Letus and now I am using the AF100 with my Zeiss lenses. The AF100 can look just as filmic as the Letus set up. In fact I did a two camera interview set up last week. One camera was the AF100 the other was an HVX200 with a Redrock. We set the cameras to similar settings, except I dropped the detail level in the AF100 lower, and they match great, with great DOF from both. Very filmic! I'm VERY happy with the look of the AF100. It also handles the blacks much better than the HVX/Letus. Much less grain in the blacks, actually NO grain.
 
One thing I've been concerned about and have commented on many times is the race for higher resolution, as if it's some sort of Holy Grail. The fact is, our mental images of "filmic" are often not linked to resolution at all. In fact over the years most 35mm cinematographers have used some sort of diffusion, ProMists or SoftFX etc.

I don't have my AF100 yet, but one thing I am looking forward to is being able to use my collection of filters again (I have over fifty 4x4 and 4x546). The diffusion glass doesn't work as well on smaller chips, but should add a nice quality to the overly-resolved images from the 100.
 
great posts. this has been the battle to stay somewhere in between since i got my af100. once i shot first clips, my immediate reaction was, oh my, i sold my redrock encore. i loved the feel it gave an image when using with my old xha1 or hvx200. but as many have stated, the light loss (even on a 1.8 lens) was substantial, though the payoff was worth it. the af100 is a nice compact unit when compared to the adapter kits, with certain settings i think it could be close. i am playing with DRS 1, it introduces slight grain and opens the range of the image; still altering the settings though.
 
this is the same discussion that happened when RED came out. In the end, everyone agreed that it simply had it's own look. Michael Mann and Soderbergh, are some of the filmmakers who really are pushing that "content is king" aspect. Soon there really won't be film to even compare to. James Cameron has stated that he wants to bring 60FPS to the mainstream as it's far more natural and real. I have the Brevis on my HVX and it simply looks wonderful. However, there have been many shoots where I would abandon the idea of bringing it to a shoot because it wasn't convenient. In time, the AF100 will have it's own standard, just like i can smell the 5D or 7D a mile away. Here are a couple of clips from my HVX/Brevis setup:

http://10framehandles.com/movies/FFC-bobgundu.mov
http://10framehandles.com/movies/tracksLaneway.mov

I'm looking forward to making pretty images with the new kid on the block.
 
James Cameron has stated that he wants to bring 60FPS
Click to expand...

Funny, 20 year ago when I was making my living with commercials everyone was saying that TV should be shot at 30fps, so Arri and Panavision pushed for that for a while (Kodak of course loved it, more film per shoot). Now the video people are shooting 24p to look like film, go figure.

I've shot commercials with the HVX and Red Rock with Nikors, and have also been very pleased with all but the setup and viewfinder options (I handhold). The AF100 will (hopefully, and with the filters I mentioned) more than fill that need.
 
Mac said:
Funny, 20 year ago when I was making my living with commercials everyone was saying that TV should be shot at 30fps, so Arri and Panavision pushed for that for a while (Kodak of course loved it, more film per shoot).
Click to expand...

In Japan, in video, you basically shoot everything at 30P.
 
Brian@202020 said:
This is true, the ground glass on adapter does soften the image a bit. The AF100 is sharp yet shallow DoP similar to a RED where as adapter footage is slightly soft. your idea about a promist filter should do the trick. Are you using 1/4 black promist?
Click to expand...

Im using the 1/2. I tried the 1/4. but the 1/2 was a better image in ny opinion. It doesn't turn the image to mush at all. give it a try,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top