SGPro or Brevis 35??
- Thread starter Slinkii
- Start date
DavidChia
Well-known member
The Phantom HD does that and more too. And it is pretty small
Aerialsfilm M*
Well-known member
Just look into what combo you want, and what you'll use it for the most.
Both adapters can be used for any type of filming. Also remember that a lighter weight is not always the best choice for shoulder-mounts too. The lighter the weight, the easier you'll get shocks in the image, but that of course is dependent from the total length of your rig, and of course too heavy is not an option either.
Both adapters can be used for any type of filming. Also remember that a lighter weight is not always the best choice for shoulder-mounts too. The lighter the weight, the easier you'll get shocks in the image, but that of course is dependent from the total length of your rig, and of course too heavy is not an option either.
DC
Cinematographiliac
Yeah, Red is great BUT you're looking at a $30k-$50k investment for a useful camera package. For under $10k you can get, say, a pretty decent HVX200/Brevis camera package. You won't get that superior Red quality but it will look really nice for many applications.
Even if yo uchoose brevis, From a professioanl standpoint i highly reccomend using rails to support the system. Ther is no reason to have 1-2 pounds of weight hanging off the end of your cmaera 8 inches out. It scares me.... Use rails. PLease......
The HVX200 together with harddrives, P2 cards, a mini35 and lenses is quite expensive. You get a full productionready package with the best quality in the industry for $20k. It's totally worth the money.
"The Phantom HD does that and more too. And it is pretty small"
What's the price? Is it really worth the price compared to a RED?
I'm sceptic about that.
"The Phantom HD does that and more too. And it is pretty small"
What's the price? Is it really worth the price compared to a RED?
I'm sceptic about that.
indeed my zooms and wa lenses look great on sg. nice and clean no vingetting or soft edges. i only have 1 lens that vingettes. a 17mm thts made by vivitar. but it will vingette on anything even my film cameras.
Tim Naylor
Veteran
Sounds like Brevis has made huge improvements since I last had one. Find some folks in your area who own one or the other and test them. I'm going to try to get my hands on a recent model and take it through its paces. Really test them. At several stops, shutter speeds, pulling focus, focus and rez charts etc if you're really torn.
Regarding the comment that rails and such are too big for field use, I'm not sure what field he's talking about. I still find a full rail set up and monitor lightweight, compared to ENG or film cameras or any professional rig for that matter. Also, regarding set up time, I leave mine built in an ENG case, because my camera goes out with an adaptor more often than not.
With either you will need a matte bx and filters if you want to control your DOF under any conditions. If weight is a super concern, go Brevis, get screw on filters and a screw on sun shade. That would be truly a stealth package. Myself, I just attach a Cardellini to my rails and voila - handgrip.
And RED comments, get a grip on reality and do a real budget. To do it right, and be able to present and rent yourself as a pro, you will spend more than 60k. The body's the cheap part. And that Phantom comment, please talk the real truth, the body is 2500/day with lens/accessories, you looking at 5000/day. You're also tethered to a computer.
Regarding the comment that rails and such are too big for field use, I'm not sure what field he's talking about. I still find a full rail set up and monitor lightweight, compared to ENG or film cameras or any professional rig for that matter. Also, regarding set up time, I leave mine built in an ENG case, because my camera goes out with an adaptor more often than not.
With either you will need a matte bx and filters if you want to control your DOF under any conditions. If weight is a super concern, go Brevis, get screw on filters and a screw on sun shade. That would be truly a stealth package. Myself, I just attach a Cardellini to my rails and voila - handgrip.
And RED comments, get a grip on reality and do a real budget. To do it right, and be able to present and rent yourself as a pro, you will spend more than 60k. The body's the cheap part. And that Phantom comment, please talk the real truth, the body is 2500/day with lens/accessories, you looking at 5000/day. You're also tethered to a computer.
Lenilenapi
Carbonite Member
TimurCivan is correct. Whether you choose the Brevis or not, don't plan on using this gear without rails and a some support. its just too much hanging off the end of the camera. Its Ok for some handheld stuff now & again, but I wouldn't hang that off my HVX all day without support.
As for those who complain that its too big and that there has to be a better way - I doubt it. It's just mechanics - my good you're sticking a 35mm lens on the end of a camera, its amazing that it works at all. i don't see how it could be a whole lot smaller.
Tim, I don't know when you last tried the Brevis, but Dennis is constantly improving it, so if you looked at it last year for example its much improved today.
I don't think you need the mattebox for anything of extreme importance though and it adds weight and expense. If you want to use Grad's - its vital. Otherwise, you don't it unless you want it for show.
You can more cheaply and just as effectively throw round ND filters off the Nikons themselves with a lens shade. I don't think you actually need the ND's either though they certainly add to your control. Most of the basic low DOF comes from the 35mm adapter not a more open fstop. In fact i think with many of these units you may fighting the super-low DOF and want to stop down your 35mm lenses a touch for better performance
- Lenny Levy
As for those who complain that its too big and that there has to be a better way - I doubt it. It's just mechanics - my good you're sticking a 35mm lens on the end of a camera, its amazing that it works at all. i don't see how it could be a whole lot smaller.
Tim, I don't know when you last tried the Brevis, but Dennis is constantly improving it, so if you looked at it last year for example its much improved today.
I don't think you need the mattebox for anything of extreme importance though and it adds weight and expense. If you want to use Grad's - its vital. Otherwise, you don't it unless you want it for show.
You can more cheaply and just as effectively throw round ND filters off the Nikons themselves with a lens shade. I don't think you actually need the ND's either though they certainly add to your control. Most of the basic low DOF comes from the 35mm adapter not a more open fstop. In fact i think with many of these units you may fighting the super-low DOF and want to stop down your 35mm lenses a touch for better performance
- Lenny Levy
Last edited:
Tim Naylor
Veteran
I'll definitely get my hands on the new and improved Brevis. Sounds like Dennis listens and makes sound changes.
re: F Stop. F Stop has a dramatic effect on DOF. It's part of the trinity of DOF (distance and focal length being the other two). It's the reason digi primes exist - they still hold wide open. It's the reason, we try to hunt down good deals on Nikons that open to a 1.4. It's not just to get more light. Contrast too is affected by stop. More wide open, the more internal flaring hence a lower contrast in the blacks. This is an effect that we still use today and was big in the 70's (ie. Owen Roizeman, ASC, French Connection). Converserly, a pinhole will give you bullet proof blacks (ie. Manuel Figueroa, MSC, John Fords "The Fugitive"). An F 8 is a poor match for a shot done wide open. The main reasons I keep F stop roughly the same through out a scene are consistent DOF and contrast. Consistency can make or break you as a DP especially when continuity is crucial. Then there are situations where you just need to ND. My first Varicam 35 Pro Adaptor gig, we were shooting a subject against a hot sky (way over a hundred). Our light gave us an f8 and the dreaded dark line around the subject against the sky appeared, making the shot look cheap. Then we ND'd to a 2.8 and the sky softened up and the internal flaring completely obscured the video dark line to the point people think we shot it on film (because only on film do we laugh at hot skies and the videographers who run in fear of them). It was a perfect example of ND's saving the day through DOF and contrast.
Anyway, ND's are your most vital tool for controlling DOF, especially outside. Often what mother nature hands us is neither desirable or consistent. Beyond grads, if moving fast is crucial, so is a matte box. If seconds count (magic hour shots), switching out glass via filter tray is just faster than screw ons.
My nickels worth.
Tim Naylor - DP
www.timnaylor.com
Last edited:
You're a pretty irate guy when it comes to adapters.
Lenilenapi
Carbonite Member
Tim,
I used to be film shooter as well, so I won't argue with you about the value of control, though I think that matching contrast is far less important in video than in film as you can adjust that any number of places in the chain, so f-stop consistency is not quite as as important. An equally big issue for all of us is matching the lenses themselves which can have different color as well as contrast and sharpness characteristics.
My main point is that with the 35mm adapters we have another exposure tool available to us, the iris on the video camera - In my case an HVX200.
To be honest I haven't looked at this outside recently so I could be wrong here, but it seems to me that using the internal ND's together with the video camera's iris you can pretty much still shoot outdoors at open 35mm lens f-stops without ND's. You may choose to use them and I think its great to have them, but they aren't a live and die neccessity and neither is a mattebox if you don't use grads. Sure the mattebox is a little faster, but really how long does it take to switch a screw in filter?
On these forums we're often talking to people who are choosing between a third or fourth lens or a mattebox. Likewise people who are choosing between f1.4 or f2 or f2.8 lenses all based on cost. Again i would maintain that the big gain in low DOF is to be using the adapter at all and f1.4 vs 2.8 doesn't make the critical difference.
In fact with Nikon lenses (as opposed to cinema Zeiss superspeeds) the lenses aren't optimized for 1.4 anyway so it is dangerous to shoot that wide open and you see far more problems on these forums with people shooting with too low a DOF than too high. In fact the DOF on most of these adapters is lower than 35mm film.
On a Brevis there is far more difference shooting with the CF3L screen with low DOF than say the CF1L (higher DOF) than there is between f1.4 and f2.8. The screens on all these adapters themselves affect the DOF enormously. That's a very nice feature of the Brevis BTW - 3 different screens with more or less DOF and likewise more or less apparent sharpness.
I used to be film shooter as well, so I won't argue with you about the value of control, though I think that matching contrast is far less important in video than in film as you can adjust that any number of places in the chain, so f-stop consistency is not quite as as important. An equally big issue for all of us is matching the lenses themselves which can have different color as well as contrast and sharpness characteristics.
My main point is that with the 35mm adapters we have another exposure tool available to us, the iris on the video camera - In my case an HVX200.
To be honest I haven't looked at this outside recently so I could be wrong here, but it seems to me that using the internal ND's together with the video camera's iris you can pretty much still shoot outdoors at open 35mm lens f-stops without ND's. You may choose to use them and I think its great to have them, but they aren't a live and die neccessity and neither is a mattebox if you don't use grads. Sure the mattebox is a little faster, but really how long does it take to switch a screw in filter?
On these forums we're often talking to people who are choosing between a third or fourth lens or a mattebox. Likewise people who are choosing between f1.4 or f2 or f2.8 lenses all based on cost. Again i would maintain that the big gain in low DOF is to be using the adapter at all and f1.4 vs 2.8 doesn't make the critical difference.
In fact with Nikon lenses (as opposed to cinema Zeiss superspeeds) the lenses aren't optimized for 1.4 anyway so it is dangerous to shoot that wide open and you see far more problems on these forums with people shooting with too low a DOF than too high. In fact the DOF on most of these adapters is lower than 35mm film.
On a Brevis there is far more difference shooting with the CF3L screen with low DOF than say the CF1L (higher DOF) than there is between f1.4 and f2.8. The screens on all these adapters themselves affect the DOF enormously. That's a very nice feature of the Brevis BTW - 3 different screens with more or less DOF and likewise more or less apparent sharpness.
Last edited:
JasonFox
Internet Sensation
First time: 5 minutes. Thereafter: 2-3.
Tim Naylor
Veteran
I hear you. Good points. Outside though, I steer clear of the internal ND's, they have a profound effect on clarity with the HVX.
Jason Ramsey
Admin
What I have read about using the on camera ND filter is that the ground glass frame will still be overexposed. The on camera ND filter is cutting the amount of light coming into the cameras lens, but it's not cutting the amount of light coming into the 35mm lens, and of course not the ground glass either. The side effect (I have read) is softness in the image. That's why it's best to cut the amount of light before it gets to the gg/diffuser.
Tim, the softness you spoke of with the HVX's ND filters... is that only when using a 35 adapter, or is that something you have noticed always? Just curious... wondering if it might be for the reason listed above. I haven't noticed softness in the image with on camera ND filters using the bare lens of the HVX, but I can't say I combed over it, or shot vital stuff outside, so...
Anyways... ND filter before the 35mm lens is the optimal setup.
Jason
Tim, the softness you spoke of with the HVX's ND filters... is that only when using a 35 adapter, or is that something you have noticed always? Just curious... wondering if it might be for the reason listed above. I haven't noticed softness in the image with on camera ND filters using the bare lens of the HVX, but I can't say I combed over it, or shot vital stuff outside, so...
Anyways... ND filter before the 35mm lens is the optimal setup.
Jason
hehe this is gonna becme DP shootout thread....
the gg is a linear trandsmitter of light. its not chemichal, theres no "activation" point. putting nd's infront is unless they are grads, in my opinion. Unless you need to keep the 35 lens open and you want to avoid using the internal nd's. i dont understand this "blowing out" a gg business....
the gg is a linear trandsmitter of light. its not chemichal, theres no "activation" point. putting nd's infront is unless they are grads, in my opinion. Unless you need to keep the 35 lens open and you want to avoid using the internal nd's. i dont understand this "blowing out" a gg business....
Last edited: