weakest link 35mm...

A

arrestthisman

Well-known member
Question: I have a hvx200, like everyone else here on this board :)

I'm thinking about getting a 35mm adapter for a couple of reasons. 1. I'm amazed at the quality of the camera output, and want to maximize my options. 2. My dad has a lot of 35mm lenses I can use that are pretty high quality. So, you know, why not?

But here's the big question. It's a fixed lens. So isn't the 35mm lens only going to add shallow DOF. It won't really be a quality improvement. right?

Stick 10,000 of glass on the end of a fixed lens and in the end, the bottleneck is the fixed glass in the camera. Or am I missing something here.

Please someone tell me I'm wrong.
 
First of all, you should do a search, as 35mm adapters have been discussed at great length, and second of all, no. A 35mm adapter will not improve resolution, color spacing, other issues with video. it simply throws an image from a 35mm lens onto the front of the camera lens. It can add a very shallow DOF and adds a "softness" that when used right can make your footage more dynamic and more film-like. It is just another tool, not a "magic bullet" that will make your footage great. I love my brevis 35mm adapter, and other people love their adapters too. But also some very experienced pros on this forum dont like them because its more glass in front of their image. But, for me, its a great tool.
 
I did search for 35mm adapters. I couldn't find any post that addressed whether they add to quality or are subject to bottlenecking.

And frankly I'm very sick of people who reply to a post and tell the person they shouldn't have posted. If you feel so strongly that it didn't need to be posted. DON'T REPLY

Thank you for the answer.
 
Quick answer: you're right. No matter what you do adding more glass to the front, it's all going to be limited by the HVX's own optics and the circuitry inside. But "quality" (technical factors like resolution, color compression, etc.) is only part of the picture. So much of what we like and don't like about images is subjective or at least not subject to the same terms as the objective technical factors.

An adapter is another tool. It will give you more options in terms of look, composition, and most importantly, feel that you won't have with the stock HVX. But it will also add cost, time, and effort to anything you try to shoot. If you have a fundamental problem with the HVX's lack of resolution, it's not going to be solved by adding an adapter... you'd be better off going to a more expensive 2/3" camera.
 
I don't have a problem with a lack of resolution. I think the HVX is amazing. It's exceeded my expectations many times over, however, if I were to invest in a 35mm adapter, I would expect even a slight increase in sharpness for me to consider it worth the money. DOF is an issue, but I'm more inclined towards the f64 style of cinematography than the current hollywood, "let's get DOF paper thin so if the actor moves 1 micron we lose focus," trend.

The only thing that would be great is that I have an awesome 300mm telephoto lens. .... that would be pretty damn cool on the hvx.
 
arrestthisman said:
however, if I were to invest in a 35mm adapter, I would expect even a slight increase in sharpness for me to consider it worth the money.
Click to expand...

No, if anything a slight decrease in sharpness is all I've seen from any adapter.

arrestthisman said:
DOF is an issue, but I'm more inclined towards the f64 style of cinematography than the current hollywood, "let's get DOF paper thin so if the actor moves 1 micron we lose focus," trend.
Click to expand...

I agree on that. I find it irritating when the tip of someones nose is in focus but their eyes aren't!

arrestthisman said:
The only thing that would be great is that I have an awesome 300mm telephoto lens. .... that would be pretty damn cool on the hvx.
Click to expand...

I guess that would depend on what you need to shoot.
 
Pretty much to reiterate:
a 35mm adapter will not add any sharpness to your video.

There are plenty examples of plent of people fine tuning their setups so it appears to be pretty much resolution lossless.

i know these arn't full size but check out this thread:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=92094

That's some sharp stuff right there.
 
That's good to know about the zoom. I won't have any you know... feelings about the ... wow I just totally had a brain freeze.

Speaking of which, it's probably because I had to edit in Avid tonight....

Not to get off topic, but I think it may be some of the worst software in the world. It has more bugs and stability issues than windows ME. Yes... I went there.

Back to the lenses. Thanks for all of the info. I think I'm going to pass on the adapter solutions. I think the glass in the HVX is plenty good.

Here's a quick thought. Not to be a rationalist, but to the purists out there, film, 15,000 dollar lenses. I liken them to audio snobs. (You know who I'm talking about.) The guys who'll pay ten times the price to get 10% more qualitative improvement.

I have a friend. A musician. Very talented, but is spending his money left and right on "the best" equipment, meanwhile his music hasn't gotten any better in the last 4 years. I don't think it sounds any better either. I think there comes a point where quality is "good enough" (these are all generalizations and of course there are situations where a film needs the best to work), and it's time to improve craft. (On the flip side I know people who REALLY need to spend some time learning/updating their equipment.)

I know I'm pontificating here, but I hang around a very creative circle, and I just notice that some people's priorities seem to be a bit off. There's always a balance.

The point is, I am proud to own an HVX. If by chance I happen to get funding for a big movie someday. The Hydra solution or the RED would be great... IF the story calls for characteristics and quality the HVX simply can't achieve. I grew up in the digital age and make no apologies for prefering digital over celluloid.

alright I'm done. To those who listened, thank you very much. To those who didn't, you made the right choice

- Alex
 
"Bob Johnson's Right!":beer:

Of course it comes down to content, yeah you can flash and wow em but they will remember you more if you touch or scare them (no touching jokes please!) :)

Alex, you raise some interesting points. I too have thought long and hard about the adapter choice from dvx to hvx. I like sharp focus. I worry that it might add another day to a two-day promo set-up. I’ve always wavered. I love the images, Timur is getting the best out of the HVX/ adapter at the moment and I've seen stuff from the DVX that has almost made me :crybaby: . I think we ALL should get one and output 2k images and explore all the possibilities involved with thease fantastic cameras.

But for a guy like me, shooting fast, on location, using different grip equip, I think I'm going to explore just what the HVX stock lens can do for the moment, you can achieve DOF with the stock lens, nothing compared with an adapter but its there!

One thing I’ve learnt working in this business is good ideas sell whatever they look like. Just watch some old Laurel and Hardy, talk to me about focus then! Craft and content always sell.

I'm also getting back into filters and natural daylight!!

:beer: Viva the Anti Adapter- Pro Sunlight Revolution!! :beer:
 
I liken this whole conversation to a trip I took to Bordeaux a few years back. In talking to one of the wine makers at a famous, unnamed first growth, he said the best wine in the world is the one you like best. This is soooo subjective. I admit that using my adapter means a longer set-up and perhaps a slight loss in "crispness." But there are some images with the adapter, especially outdoors (I have a Letus35 FE) that have a richness and depth to them I could not achieve with the stock camera. However when it comes to shooting spontaneously (I do mostly docs), the adapter can hamper rather than help. So, it depends on what the wine tastes like on that day. Does that make sense? :beer:
 
arrestthisman said:
I did search for 35mm adapters. I couldn't find any post that addressed whether they add to quality or are subject to bottlenecking.

And frankly I'm very sick of people who reply to a post and tell the person they shouldn't have posted. If you feel so strongly that it didn't need to be posted. DON'T REPLY

Thank you for the answer.
Click to expand...
To -arrest this man; I didnt tell you you shouldnt have posted. dont put words in my mouth. I thought your post reflected that you didnt do a search because this exact subject has been talked about over and over and over. I was simply trying to give you advice that might help you make a decision, because it was all of the people on this forum that posted about how happy they were with their 35mm adapter that inspired me to finally pull the trigger and buy one. I wasnt trying to be nasty. Hopefully you can take away enough from this post to make a final decision. Were all friends here and i wish you the best! ...and i think you should just buy one because if nothing else they're a **** ton of fun and give some really great images.
 
Jake, it's cool. Calm down man. :)

As I said, I did search before posting, and all I could find was disc. on types of adapters, value etc, but not the fundemental yes/no of degrading quality or improving it.

Also, I wasn't refering to you when I made the middle comment there. I was probably being pithy, but your comment REMINDof the types who chastise for pahsting anything that's been covered even in a disperate capacity.

Your post did help. That's why I thanked you for the answer. It was not motivated by sarcasm, although in hindsight it appears that way, for which I apologize. That's the problem with text. No body language ever. ever. ever.

We are all friends here, comrades, if you will. I'm here to build huge bridges not burn them. I wish you the best as well. Always. And Forever.

But truth be told, I'm NOT going to buy one now out of pure spite, simply because YOU recommended it to me and I will do the exact opposite of what you think. HArdy boys 23:13
 
Last edited:
arrestthisman said:
I don't have a problem with a lack of resolution. I think the HVX is amazing. It's exceeded my expectations many times over, however, if I were to invest in a 35mm adapter, I would expect even a slight increase in sharpness for me to consider it worth the money. DOF is an issue, but I'm more inclined towards the f64 style of cinematography than the current hollywood, "let's get DOF paper thin so if the actor moves 1 micron we lose focus," trend.

The only thing that would be great is that I have an awesome 300mm telephoto lens. .... that would be pretty damn cool on the hvx.
Click to expand...

So, you really don't need a 35mm adapter at all, stay with the HVX200 as it is.
 
arrestthisman said:
Jake, it's cool. Calm down man. :)

As I said, I did search before posting, and all I could find was disc. on types of adapters, value etc, but not the fundemental yes/no of degrading quality or improving it.

Also, I wasn't refering to you when I made the middle comment there. I was probably being overly pithy, but your comment REMINDED me of the types who chastise for posting anything that's been covered even in a disperate capacity.

Your post did help. That's why I thanked you for the answer. It was not motivated by sarcasm, although in hindsight it appears that way, for which I apologize. That's the problem with text. No body language :)

We are all friends here, comrades, if you will. I'm here to build bridges not burn them. I wish you the best as well.

But truth be told, I'm NOT going to buy one now out of pure spite, simply because YOU recommended it to me and I will do the exact opposite of what you think. HA
Click to expand...
wow. not even gonna touch that.
 
esperman said:
It would help if people could put down the crack pipe before posting.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? I LOVE my crackpipe. As a clinicaly insane person, I need as many elements of happy to keep the satillites out of my head.
 
LSD is not as bad for you as people think. I'd never do it, though.

Anyway, I've decided that I think I am going to do the Redrock. It's inexpensive, and I actually don't know how much I believe in the degradation of the image.

I looked at some high-rez samples and honestly, all I could see was an improvement. The light loss is a not a big deal to me. But yes, I did not notice ANY loss in sharpness, and comparing it side by side I did actually see improvement in SOME scenes.

That said, even if my eye isn't as good as others, and I'm wrong, the sacrifice (to me) obviously is nil compared to the benefits. Redrock+Hydra would be SO awesome. Like a little SI-2k, for less money and with more flexibility! (+on board audio)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top