When all is said and done, I should have just bought a DSLR...
- Thread starter nedcam
- Start date
TheReverend
Well-known member
One thing you MUST know about this lens before buying: It is a Micro 4/3 lens, so you will only be able to use it on M4/3 cams! (AF100 GH#) The lens is kinda new to us, (1-2months) and there isn't a ton that we have needed to shoot with it yet.
I've got one link that i can show you right now that is kinda meh (this project was shot/edited super quick and dirty). First of all, it's a youtube link so the quality goes down the toilet. The link was shot in 1080p but we timelined and rendered in 720p so that we could crop the shot without losing resolution (the "tight shot"), because we basically one taked the thing and I need to have some kind of cuts for flow. This IS NOT full 1080p crisp-rez. Also to be clear, only the shots of the pastor talking to the camera are the 12mm SLR Magic. Notice how wide and shallow that main uncropped shot is. The camera too was VERY close to him. Like 2-3ft away? maybe 4? I cant tell you for sure either if the iris was 100% open in this shot, but it was close.
We just did an interview, where the lens blew me away. We couldn't find our small light kit and we were going to this guys house to do a interview. We get there and the room that looked the best was a small office. There was a desk against a wall, small space to walk/stand, and a couch against the other wall with a window behind it. We were able to put the GH2 as cam1 with the 12mm SLR Magic at the edge of the couch facing the desk. So basically, tripod -> 2ish feet -> face. So wide, it still got the full torso. We used only the sunlight coming in the window, and the shot is GREAT. Desk and wall have good blur, subject has crisp resolution, I mean I couldnt believe it. We have a 16mm-50mm 2.8 that we used to use in these kind of circumstances, but that lens wouldve failed this shoot miserably.
I'll try to post a couple stills from that interview soon.
The Scarlet is a fantastic camera with super quality images, but it will not ever give you the "DSLR look" IMO. Here's my take on the "DSLR look." To me, it is really just two things: wide and shallow. I've shot quite a few vids with the AF100 with a 50mm 1.4 nikon. Super shallow and honestly looks really cinematic. But not that "DSLR look". I've shot alot with a AF100 and a 16mm at f2.8 lens that was wide and reasonably fast enough for 99% of shoots. But still not the "DSLR look."
"DSLR look" is the combination of the two: wide AND shallow. And this is why the 5D is king of the "DSLR look". No one does it wider or faster because of the sensor size. You can put a 30mm lens on a 5D, and it's like the widest shot ever and it's easy to get 1.8 or lower aperatures in those mm sizes and you end up with crazy shallow DOF. It's both wide and shallow with the camera right on top of the subject. Do that, and you'll get that "DSLR look" everytime.
The AF100 has trouble with this because it's hard to get both shallow AND wide. The nokton 25mm 0.95 gets you super shallow, but is still missing that "wide" look and perspective you get with the camera 3 feet away from the subject. And the Tokina 11-16 gets you wide, but 2.8 just isnt enough shallow to get that DSLR look.
That's why when i first saw an image from the SLR Magic 12mm 1.6 i was like "I have to get that lens." It gets both the super wide, and super shallow with a great focus range that lets you sit right on top of your subject. To me, this lens is THE go to lens for M4/3 to get the "DSLR look".
I've got one link that i can show you right now that is kinda meh (this project was shot/edited super quick and dirty). First of all, it's a youtube link so the quality goes down the toilet. The link was shot in 1080p but we timelined and rendered in 720p so that we could crop the shot without losing resolution (the "tight shot"), because we basically one taked the thing and I need to have some kind of cuts for flow. This IS NOT full 1080p crisp-rez. Also to be clear, only the shots of the pastor talking to the camera are the 12mm SLR Magic. Notice how wide and shallow that main uncropped shot is. The camera too was VERY close to him. Like 2-3ft away? maybe 4? I cant tell you for sure either if the iris was 100% open in this shot, but it was close.
We just did an interview, where the lens blew me away. We couldn't find our small light kit and we were going to this guys house to do a interview. We get there and the room that looked the best was a small office. There was a desk against a wall, small space to walk/stand, and a couch against the other wall with a window behind it. We were able to put the GH2 as cam1 with the 12mm SLR Magic at the edge of the couch facing the desk. So basically, tripod -> 2ish feet -> face. So wide, it still got the full torso. We used only the sunlight coming in the window, and the shot is GREAT. Desk and wall have good blur, subject has crisp resolution, I mean I couldnt believe it. We have a 16mm-50mm 2.8 that we used to use in these kind of circumstances, but that lens wouldve failed this shoot miserably.
I'll try to post a couple stills from that interview soon.
The Scarlet is a fantastic camera with super quality images, but it will not ever give you the "DSLR look" IMO. Here's my take on the "DSLR look." To me, it is really just two things: wide and shallow. I've shot quite a few vids with the AF100 with a 50mm 1.4 nikon. Super shallow and honestly looks really cinematic. But not that "DSLR look". I've shot alot with a AF100 and a 16mm at f2.8 lens that was wide and reasonably fast enough for 99% of shoots. But still not the "DSLR look."
"DSLR look" is the combination of the two: wide AND shallow. And this is why the 5D is king of the "DSLR look". No one does it wider or faster because of the sensor size. You can put a 30mm lens on a 5D, and it's like the widest shot ever and it's easy to get 1.8 or lower aperatures in those mm sizes and you end up with crazy shallow DOF. It's both wide and shallow with the camera right on top of the subject. Do that, and you'll get that "DSLR look" everytime.
The AF100 has trouble with this because it's hard to get both shallow AND wide. The nokton 25mm 0.95 gets you super shallow, but is still missing that "wide" look and perspective you get with the camera 3 feet away from the subject. And the Tokina 11-16 gets you wide, but 2.8 just isnt enough shallow to get that DSLR look.
That's why when i first saw an image from the SLR Magic 12mm 1.6 i was like "I have to get that lens." It gets both the super wide, and super shallow with a great focus range that lets you sit right on top of your subject. To me, this lens is THE go to lens for M4/3 to get the "DSLR look".
Last edited:
I'd add "wide, shallow and still-camera colour science".
I think a significant appeal of dSLRs in general and the 5Dii in particular is that it produces movies with colours very similar to a still camera shot of the same scene.
That's not something you really could say for the video cameras I'd used up until that point, which tended to produce much muddier and more neutral footage. Video cameras were good if you are heading for grading, bad for wow factor. Which was even more important given that the look is baked in: it needed to look good straight off the camera.
Which it undeniably does. 5Dii footage is crappy in oh so many ways, but it's still SEXY
Cheers, Hywel.
I think a significant appeal of dSLRs in general and the 5Dii in particular is that it produces movies with colours very similar to a still camera shot of the same scene.
That's not something you really could say for the video cameras I'd used up until that point, which tended to produce much muddier and more neutral footage. Video cameras were good if you are heading for grading, bad for wow factor. Which was even more important given that the look is baked in: it needed to look good straight off the camera.
Which it undeniably does. 5Dii footage is crappy in oh so many ways, but it's still SEXY
Cheers, Hywel.
Preach it, Reverend!
well I agree that the 5D does give you wide and shallow depth of field, I would argue that is hardly what makes a DSLR it's "look". DSLR look to me, is a nice creamy soft background. You could never get that with a traditional video camera. Any focal length in my opinion. If you want that, shoot with longer lenses, 25mm minimum. Problem solved. You have to figure out what you are going for in an interview. In my opinion a 12mm for an interview is a look I don't personally like (others may). It gives sort of a comedy video feel to it, opposed to the same shot using a 50mm or longer. Not many people I've seen will do an interview on anything less than a 50mm on M 4/3 or super 35, because longer lenses gives an intimate feel and doesn't distort the face, rather a natural look.
I did a quick google search and this is an example of what I'm talking about. http://www.petapixel.com/2011/11/07/a-striking-look-at-how-focal-length-affect-head-shots/
I did a quick google search and this is an example of what I'm talking about. http://www.petapixel.com/2011/11/07/a-striking-look-at-how-focal-length-affect-head-shots/
Last edited:
Here is a much better example of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRoqNx9rlVA
I think using longer focal length for anything that has to do with interviewing, especially for a close up is a much better look for the talent. The front of their face will seem exaggerated and long with a shorter focal length with the cam being a few feet from the face.
I think using longer focal length for anything that has to do with interviewing, especially for a close up is a much better look for the talent. The front of their face will seem exaggerated and long with a shorter focal length with the cam being a few feet from the face.
Last edited:
keylight
Veteran
B.. b... b... but the nice creamy soft background IS from a shallow depth of field. (Could also be a less nice but equally creamy soft foreground too.)
Typically shorter focal lengths are pretty sharp and everything is in focus, exterior shots, landscapes, transition shots, etc so I don't see the wide and shallow depth of field thing defining a DSLR. Most shallow depth of field shots that remind me of a cinematic look or DSLR's aren't typically shorter than 25mm on a crop sensor. Narrative shots for example wouldn't shoot a closeup or medium closeup with 12mm to achieve a shallow depth of field, they would shoot longer and further back to keep perspective in check and give a nice cinematic look. I've never heard of someone trying to get a knocked out background for an interview with a 12mm. Reverend mentions shooting with a 50mm and says that is further away from a DSLR look, but I don't see that at all. 50mm and 85mm give a beautiful look to images from the AF100 at 1.4.
Last edited:
While simply increasing subject separation and focal length will give you shallow DOF, the unique aspect of DSLR (esp. Full Frame) is that shallow DOF is possible at wider focal lengths.
Like anything, I think there's a time where is works and a time where it doesn't... for instance, if you're primarily concerned only with the words and intimate thoughts of the subject, or are stuck with a blah background, sure, do the 60 minutes thing and give us a face full of emotion. If the person is important in the context of their environment, then by all means use a wide/fast lens, and give us a taste of their surroundings in just enough focus to get a feel, but blurred enough to concentrate attention to the subject.
That wide/fast thing is exactly what 2/3" and smaller sensor video cameras have never done with success.
As to application, I shoot impromptu interviews in small, small, small offices frequently... the 17.5/0.95 works perfectly for such applications
Like anything, I think there's a time where is works and a time where it doesn't... for instance, if you're primarily concerned only with the words and intimate thoughts of the subject, or are stuck with a blah background, sure, do the 60 minutes thing and give us a face full of emotion. If the person is important in the context of their environment, then by all means use a wide/fast lens, and give us a taste of their surroundings in just enough focus to get a feel, but blurred enough to concentrate attention to the subject.
That wide/fast thing is exactly what 2/3" and smaller sensor video cameras have never done with success.
As to application, I shoot impromptu interviews in small, small, small offices frequently... the 17.5/0.95 works perfectly for such applications
Last edited:
TheReverend
Well-known member
I want to be clear. There is a HUGE difference between good, cinematic, filmic video, and the "DSLR look". In my mind you aren't talking about the "DSLR look", you are talking about good cinematography, and I agree with your opinions on what is good. 12mm isn't necessarily the best for an interview, but it is the "DSLR look" that everyone prizes these days. What we are talking about is the "DSLR look" fad, that is what it is. People want it. It's not great cinematography by any means. "DSLR look" has never been about good cinematography (ask people about how big their light kit is). It's about what people like and want despite it not being the best.
Again you illustrate what I'm saying. Those lens do give a great look! Check this link. Totally good look! But I would say it doesn't have that "DSLR look". Every shot has a compressed perspective and that is not what the FF 5D would look like.
Inherently, what I'm saying is that M4/3 has a tough time getting the "DSLR look". It has GREAT images both shallow and wide! But the "DSLR look" is a fad, it's not really good cinematography, it's just the kind of perspective that people are clamouring for. Like hipsters wearing TOMS shoes. The shoes are actually crappy functionally, but they are what everyone wants in the moment.
The only way I've seen my AF100 get the "DSLR look" is the 12mm f1.6 SLR MAGIC. I gotta get a screenshot...
Last edited:
I understand what you're saying and do see a difference in the wide shots with a 5D, but I don't see how good cinematography and DSLR's should be separate. I don't know anyone that will switch to DSLR's because they don't want good cinematography. I think we choose the DSLR, large sensor camera's to try and make our cinematography better, not step backwards.
TheReverend
Well-known member
GH2 - unhacked - with SLR Magic 12mm at f1.6
Original Still
Small Color Adjustment
In my eyes this has that "DSLR look" let's break all the elements down.
1) Using ONLY available sunlight.
2) Crammed into a tighter space than you should be shooting.
3) Subject in focus and background out of focus (though background is only 2-3 feet from subject)
4) A wide perspective that you see alot of surroundings and torso despite being close to the subject (camera 2-3 feet from subject).
Is it great cinematography? No, to be sure. Is it the "DSLR look" that people are striving for. I'd say so.
Original Still
Small Color Adjustment
In my eyes this has that "DSLR look" let's break all the elements down.
1) Using ONLY available sunlight.
2) Crammed into a tighter space than you should be shooting.
3) Subject in focus and background out of focus (though background is only 2-3 feet from subject)
4) A wide perspective that you see alot of surroundings and torso despite being close to the subject (camera 2-3 feet from subject).
Is it great cinematography? No, to be sure. Is it the "DSLR look" that people are striving for. I'd say so.
Last edited:
TheReverend
Well-known member
You are right! That's what people "should be" striving for. But like in real-life, that's not how it works out. Customers want the "DSLR look", and unfortunately, that can mean bad cinematography choices.
Think about it like this, when going for the "DSLR look", why on earth would you EVER stop down? The whole point is bokeh and shallow... Stop down so you can pull focus better? Nah, wide open iris all the way! Even if subject is going in and out of focus, no one seems to care these days. This is the mindset of the "DSLR look" and people that are asking for it. It means that even though you might know a better way to do it that is more right (keeping the subject in focus), you HAVE to give the customer what they want.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
I think the small differences between formats are irrelevant.
This is a client mind set..
2009 - commissions a load stuff on EX1 (or whatever)
2010 - 'hears of amazing new cameras with a cool look 'DLSR'
2011 - commissions on DLSR - the footage does indeed look cool
2012 still asking for DSLR, suspicious of camera that look a bit like an EX1 (or whatever) as they are not DSLR
pure ignorance thats all
S
This is a client mind set..
2009 - commissions a load stuff on EX1 (or whatever)
2010 - 'hears of amazing new cameras with a cool look 'DLSR'
2011 - commissions on DLSR - the footage does indeed look cool
2012 still asking for DSLR, suspicious of camera that look a bit like an EX1 (or whatever) as they are not DSLR
pure ignorance thats all
S
TheReverend
Well-known member
Lol.
This too for the ignorant clients that don't know the differences in footage. I think we were mostly talking about clients who could see the differences in footage between a 1/3" cam and APC sensor camera.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
I think clients think DSLR can do big out of focus highlights, and thats what they want, no more no less.
And of course that look is from any FF or S35 or MFT camera, just not a 1/3 camera
They ask for DSLR all they mean is not 1/3
They dont get that an AF/FS is not 1/3 - because they look like 1/3 camera in form factor - brain closed - not the right camera
And of course that look is from any FF or S35 or MFT camera, just not a 1/3 camera
They ask for DSLR all they mean is not 1/3
They dont get that an AF/FS is not 1/3 - because they look like 1/3 camera in form factor - brain closed - not the right camera
Barry_Green
Moderator
Regarding color: if you like Canon DSLR color, use the AF100 "DSLR" scene file, it provides an extremely close match to the Canon look.
Regarding hyper shallow DOF: the AF100 with the Noktor and HyperPrime lenses can easily match the DOF of a 7D or other APS-C DSLRs. Not so easy to match the hyper shallow full frame look yet, but that will be easy to do when the Metabones SpeedBooster for M4/3 is available.
Regarding hyper shallow DOF: the AF100 with the Noktor and HyperPrime lenses can easily match the DOF of a 7D or other APS-C DSLRs. Not so easy to match the hyper shallow full frame look yet, but that will be easy to do when the Metabones SpeedBooster for M4/3 is available.
Last edited:
Spartacus
Veteran
I would simply call it the 5DII look. The cam started it all and its way of rendering images is unique. Far from having a technical superior image quality than other cameras, but a unique one nevertheless. It´s not about matching colors, FOV, DOF.
That said, I always shoot crop/APS-C/digital35, but you gotta give the 5DII its credit
That said, I always shoot crop/APS-C/digital35, but you gotta give the 5DII its credit