New 35 PICS
- Thread starter twocik23
- Start date
twocik23
Veteran
Hi everyone my site is up and running again.
[size=+2]CLICK THIS LINK[/size]
http://homepage.mac.com/twocik23/Menu30.html
______________________________________________
Last edited:
Motherboard
Well-known member
I shot this with the iFocus35
Motherboard
Well-known member
that was the 1.8 u sent me, and I didn't tweak anything, just left it @ 1.8
I was gonna ask u how your images look so crispy and clean, the range rover looks good all the grabs on that page look nice.
so do yours have grain and we can't see it because it's a grab from your display as opposed to an actual frame from the timeline? or you don't get any grain at all? if not could u send me your cam settings, to see if I can get the same results, I shoot just regular F6
I was gonna ask u how your images look so crispy and clean, the range rover looks good all the grabs on that page look nice.
so do yours have grain and we can't see it because it's a grab from your display as opposed to an actual frame from the timeline? or you don't get any grain at all? if not could u send me your cam settings, to see if I can get the same results, I shoot just regular F6
Last edited:
twocik23
Veteran
It looks like you had the gain on. The Range was shot with the Koinca f2.8 lens and the shutter was 1/24 and all of the settings were at default. Check your PM Unix, I'll give you a call, it's easier to explain over the phone, don't worry I'll have you up and running soon. It's probably a compression settings from the computer or like I said you had the gain on.
twocik23
Veteran
Hi Bob, how's it going?
"where abouts did you get the hoya macros?? "
Since the asian macros aren't really 10x, the magnification is a little off. So after removing the UV filter and adding two true 10x macros (hoyas), I didn't need the spacer (UV) filter anymore increasing the field of view.
"Do they cut the amount of CA by much?"
With the SD macros I really don't have much of a problem with the CA, but as you know they're cheaper macros. Now like I've said before, the hoyas or COs are not in everyones budget $$$. The more expensive macros have better quality glass and more time spent on the research and testing, I'd have to say YES.
"will post some new screen grabs soon."
Where's the clip you promised? lol
Just kidding, shoot me a few grabs when you're ready.
"where abouts did you get the hoya macros?? "
Since the asian macros aren't really 10x, the magnification is a little off. So after removing the UV filter and adding two true 10x macros (hoyas), I didn't need the spacer (UV) filter anymore increasing the field of view.
"Do they cut the amount of CA by much?"
With the SD macros I really don't have much of a problem with the CA, but as you know they're cheaper macros. Now like I've said before, the hoyas or COs are not in everyones budget $$$. The more expensive macros have better quality glass and more time spent on the research and testing, I'd have to say YES.
"will post some new screen grabs soon."
Where's the clip you promised? lol
Just kidding, shoot me a few grabs when you're ready.
Im good dude, I`ll figure out how to post some clips one day... im lazy I know.
"Since the asian macros aren't really 10x, the magnification is a little off. So after removing the UV filter and adding two true 10x macros (hoyas), I didn't need the spacer (UV) filter anymore increasing the field of view"
So if I get 2 hoyas I will be able to zoom in further than before?? Its just on my 28mm lens I get some bad vig when shooting 16:9 and if I can get a tighter framing on the GG using them I`ll order a set of them straight away. They are only £80 for 2 in the uk which is a whole load cheaper than the CO`s which are out of my budget by a long way.
Is it possible to send me some comparison frame grabs with the old and new macros?? Same scene locked off on a tripod then just switch the macros so I can get a better idea of how it affects the image. If you could that would be awesome.
"Since the asian macros aren't really 10x, the magnification is a little off. So after removing the UV filter and adding two true 10x macros (hoyas), I didn't need the spacer (UV) filter anymore increasing the field of view"
So if I get 2 hoyas I will be able to zoom in further than before?? Its just on my 28mm lens I get some bad vig when shooting 16:9 and if I can get a tighter framing on the GG using them I`ll order a set of them straight away. They are only £80 for 2 in the uk which is a whole load cheaper than the CO`s which are out of my budget by a long way.
Is it possible to send me some comparison frame grabs with the old and new macros?? Same scene locked off on a tripod then just switch the macros so I can get a better idea of how it affects the image. If you could that would be awesome.
twocik23
Veteran
"So if I get 2 hoyas I will be able to zoom in further than before??"
Yes, it makes up for what the other macros lost. I zoom in at Z67 now and MF around 08-11.
"Its just on my 28mm lens I get some bad vig when shooting 16:9 and if I can get a tighter framing on the GG using them I`ll order a set of them straight away."
You are shooting with a HD camera and this is made for a SD camera. I don't know if it will bring it that far back, cutting the vignetting out, but you can always try. All I can say is the $200.00 was well spent.
"Is it possible to send me some comparison frame grabs with the old and new macros??"
Yes I'm working on that, I just don't have much time right now. I've got this MV I'm editing that needs to be done soon. As soon as I do the comparison test, I'll PM you. Either way you would being doing the adapter a favor switching macros, cleaning up the image. Believe me I looks awesome!
Yes, it makes up for what the other macros lost. I zoom in at Z67 now and MF around 08-11.
"Its just on my 28mm lens I get some bad vig when shooting 16:9 and if I can get a tighter framing on the GG using them I`ll order a set of them straight away."
You are shooting with a HD camera and this is made for a SD camera. I don't know if it will bring it that far back, cutting the vignetting out, but you can always try. All I can say is the $200.00 was well spent.
"Is it possible to send me some comparison frame grabs with the old and new macros??"
Yes I'm working on that, I just don't have much time right now. I've got this MV I'm editing that needs to be done soon. As soon as I do the comparison test, I'll PM you. Either way you would being doing the adapter a favor switching macros, cleaning up the image. Believe me I looks awesome!
me wants to see.
ovjamaica
Well-known member
twocik23 said:
Wait, I'm confused by this. How would using PL mount lenses change the depth of field? The reason the focal plane of a 35mm is so small is because most people shoot with their adapters wide open. If you stop down a lens you'll increase your depth of field, making more of the image in focus. I don't think it's a matter of what lenses you use, it's more of a matter of physics. Unless I'm just missing something you meant by your original post.
twocik23
Veteran
"Wait, I'm confused by this. How would using PL mount lenses change the depth of field? The reason the focal plane of a 35mm is so small is because most people shoot with their adapters wide open. If you stop down a lens you'll increase your depth of field, making more of the image in focus. I don't think it's a matter of what lenses you use, it's more of a matter of physics. Unless I'm just missing something you meant by your original post."
"How would using PL mount lenses change the depth of field?"
Hi Ovjamaica,
Not the DOF, I meant the FOV. Like I said I'm still doing my homework on most of the stuff. If there's any thing you can add or help out with, feel free.
"How would using PL mount lenses change the depth of field?"
Hi Ovjamaica,
Not the DOF, I meant the FOV. Like I said I'm still doing my homework on most of the stuff. If there's any thing you can add or help out with, feel free.
ovjamaica
Well-known member
Ok, that makes more sense. Sorry, I didn't mean to sound like a jerk. If I came across that way please forgive me. I think most of us are still doing our homework. 
It was actually your design that got me thinking I could make an adapter. And now I've made one. Anyway, that would be interesting to make one with PL mount lenses. There is a guy on here (I'm sure we could dig up the thread) that made an adapter out of medium format lenses/components. Very cool idea, if you can afford it. Are you going to use a larger GG as well, or just different lenses?
It was actually your design that got me thinking I could make an adapter. And now I've made one. Anyway, that would be interesting to make one with PL mount lenses. There is a guy on here (I'm sure we could dig up the thread) that made an adapter out of medium format lenses/components. Very cool idea, if you can afford it. Are you going to use a larger GG as well, or just different lenses?
twocik23
Veteran
No offense taken, I like to be stumped with questions, it's what makes us better.
"There is a guy on here (I'm sure we could dig up the thread) that made an adapter out of medium format lenses/components."
I saw that, but never any comparison footage.
"Are you going to use a larger GG as well, or just different lenses?"
Yes, I'm in the process of a 72mm, 2000 grit ground glass, and 82mm as well. I'm also making a vibrating adapter, just can't find the right speed motor. The 2000 grit is almost unnoticeable with the grain issue as is (static), but adding a vibrator will definitely clean it up (this is for the people that don't like it, GRAIN). What convinced me to use a vibrator is the new P+S mini 35 , it doesn't spin anymore, it's vibrating!! For different lenses I would like to use 35mm primes $$$, but maybe the medium format might be an option. Salt Lake City, it's too bad your not here in my neck of the woods, I would love to team up with someone and make something incredible (two heads are better than one).
"There is a guy on here (I'm sure we could dig up the thread) that made an adapter out of medium format lenses/components."
I saw that, but never any comparison footage.
"Are you going to use a larger GG as well, or just different lenses?"
Yes, I'm in the process of a 72mm, 2000 grit ground glass, and 82mm as well. I'm also making a vibrating adapter, just can't find the right speed motor. The 2000 grit is almost unnoticeable with the grain issue as is (static), but adding a vibrator will definitely clean it up (this is for the people that don't like it, GRAIN). What convinced me to use a vibrator is the new P+S mini 35 , it doesn't spin anymore, it's vibrating!! For different lenses I would like to use 35mm primes $$$, but maybe the medium format might be an option. Salt Lake City, it's too bad your not here in my neck of the woods, I would love to team up with someone and make something incredible (two heads are better than one).
PaPa
Major Contributor
the fact that its vibrating makes me question something.
Now, idealy, the flange distance from the lens mount to the GG or film is what is ideal from the lens mount to the GG on the adapters. Now, every mm makes a slight difference in terms of sharpness and softness. Now, ( i like htat word ) to have something vibrate, in my mind of logic, would get rid of all grain and allow for more f stops before grain becomesa serious issue, BUT at the same time me thinks, hey if this thing is vibrating slight macro meters or millimeters while vibrating, this should theoritcally soften the image as the flange distance moves EVER so slightly dozens of times per second. So would the result always bea softer image with a Vibrating GG?
Now, idealy, the flange distance from the lens mount to the GG or film is what is ideal from the lens mount to the GG on the adapters. Now, every mm makes a slight difference in terms of sharpness and softness. Now, ( i like htat word ) to have something vibrate, in my mind of logic, would get rid of all grain and allow for more f stops before grain becomesa serious issue, BUT at the same time me thinks, hey if this thing is vibrating slight macro meters or millimeters while vibrating, this should theoritcally soften the image as the flange distance moves EVER so slightly dozens of times per second. So would the result always bea softer image with a Vibrating GG?