Yes I'm afraid I have another adaptor.

hey huckfinn, i am not sure what the title of the song is but it is on the soundtrack of the film RAVENOUS. maybe you already knew that, but if not that should help you.
 
Was there ever any plans made up for this diy adapter? I have a dvx100 but now have an hvx200...would like to know if there is any plans out there to build one for it(other than of course RR Micro/and more like this one described in this thread)...
 
downtownbrown said:
Was there ever any plans made up for this diy adapter? I have a dvx100 but now have an hvx200...would like to know if there is any plans out there to build one for it(other than of course RR Micro/and more like this one described in this thread)...
Click to expand...

i used a step down ring from 82-72 mm to then get started with Edweirdo's model. have not finished yet building, but will place it on this thread if and when i am successful. if you get one going i would like to know how it goes. there is a pdf plan of the Ed35 on here somewhere, but i really can not remember where it is. its not hard to find if you have a moment.
 
its been rather quiet here.. hmmm

any updates on the HVX?

cause i'm thinking to build one for the HVX...
read jetsetmodels.com, and saw the setup for the HVX, rather cool...

hmm my qn is:

1) Anyone tried? how's the result?
2) Must i have a vibrating screen? i read that the HD recording will pick up alot noise and dust on a static glass..
3) the 72mm achromatic macro lens is way expensive for my budget.. Would a cheap +10 macro lens do the same thing? i dont expect wonders to be done, but at least the IQ is still decent?
 
1: Yes. With care, excellent. The bits and pieces from Jetset models are great quality and a great value.

2: Yes.

3: In order to have a very sharp image edge to edge, you would want an Achromat. You can experiment with a diopter to play around with, and it can give a cool dream-like look. Good for music videos and perhaps commercials. But for clean images you would want to use an achromat. You can get Achromats cheap if you get them from binoculars. For an HVX, you would want to use a 10x60 or 20x60. The last number is the diameter of the lens, the first is the magnification. For my adapter, I used a 20x70 I picked up from Big 5 sports on sale for $49.
 
My experience tells me that not all achromats are created equal. Some achromats produce soft edges too. The achromat I use for my 35mm adapters are expensive as they have 3 lens elements and are coated on all sides on all the glass elements. Achromats for the HVX and DVX are more costly as you would want to use bigger optics. In using bigger optics, you use the sweet spot of the achromat which is the centre part.
 
j said:
In order to have a very sharp image edge to edge, you would want an Achromat. You can experiment with a diopter to play around with, and it can give a cool dream-like look. Good for music videos and perhaps commercials. But for clean images you would want to use an achromat. You can get Achromats cheap if you get them from binoculars. For an HVX, you would want to use a 10x60 or 20x60. The last number is the diameter of the lens, the first is the magnification. For my adapter, I used a 20x70 I picked up from Big 5 sports on sale for $49.
Click to expand...

achromat is a short term for "achromatic diopter" achromat and diopter are the same thing. macro as well. the reason you want an achromatic diopter rather than a cheap macro is to reduce chromatic abberation or CA.

but beyond that, an achromat or diopter or macro or achromatic diopter, or whatever you want to call it is all the same. but with money comes quality. glass ground and polished to tighter tolerences with better coatings to produce images with less imperfections.
 
So I made a thread about this, but I guess it was supposed to be posted here.

I'm currently making a 35mm adapter myself for my HV30 and Casio EX-F1 (one for both).. I've been doing a lot of reading and watching tutorials and I think I've got it down, the grand total coming to around $200 (which includes the Nikon Lens) which isn't bad for a static DoF adapter.

I just want to make sure all the parts and planning is correct, does this look good for anyone who is familiar with 35mm adapters/building them? Some of the items I'm buying are kinda costly and since I'm new to this I could very easily ruin my 35mm adapter funds :p

From the closest to the camera:
Stepdown ring (62mm for ex-f1, 43mm for hv30) ->
72mm achromat ->
72mm filter rings ->
72m static gg holder with canon ee-a focus screen ->
72mm to 57mm stepdown ->
filter rings for distance ->
nikon macro extension tube ->
50mm nikon f1.8 lens

I'm also wondering if there are better options for focusing screens than the ee-a, and also if it's okay to use a stepdown ring before attaching the adapter without any quality degradation or skewing..
 
Last edited:
That sounds right.

You should not have any problem with image degradation because there are no optics in the step rings. It's been a while since I experimented, but I can't remember pinhole or barrel distortion to be too much of an issue.
 
Looking back, there is pinhole and barrel distortion based upon how close/far the GG is. Luckily somewhere in the middle is best. You should get lucky right off the bat, but if it looks weird, you might want to try moving the GG back and forth.

See my tests:
http://emrl.com/j/projects/DiopterTests.htm
 
Aye, I will definitely do some experimentation with distances, I plan on ordering a few extra uv filters for the rings. Have any suggestions for somewhere I can find a lot of these for cheap, or is there no such thing? I was reading somewhere that you may need 7-8..those tests are great, however, don't most DoF adapters vary?

But my main concern is the stepdown ring I'll be using, but you along with several other sources said it should be okay... so fingers crossed.

Also, any suggestions on a focusing screen? I'm going to get the EE-a, if not, but I've heard some people dislike it.
 
Last edited:
Some people do, some don't like it. The ee-s is sharper, but has some interesting diffraction grating patterns, it makes flairs look like a web (search back in the thread if interested) The ee-a should be fine otherwise.

As for cheap filters, try camerafilters.com

What is your concern w/ the stepdown ring?

Oh, I see. Perhaps you need a stepup ring to take you from 62 to 72mm?
 
Hmm I don't know if it's already mounted, this is the achromat I plan on purchasing:

http://cgi.ebay.com/CINE-72mm-HD-ACHROMAT-LENS-with-antireflection-for-dv_W0QQitemZ350195777005QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item350195777005&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318|301%3A1|293%3A1|294%3A50

I honestly feel sooo inexperienced, almost to the point that I don't feel like I should be trying this project, but I just love the film look so much and I feel like it'll be a good learning experience too.

My concern with the stepdown is just my original concern of image degradation because my friend told me the achromat needs to be directly attached to my cam to work correctly, but at this point I don't think that's true.

The biggest fear of ee-s is the light loss I've read about, but a truer bokeh than the ee-a.. it's really hard to decide.

Also how many filter rings do you think I should be getting? As far as I know I only need a couple of 72mm ones for some minimal spacing, then several 57mm for after the gg holder..but I'm really unsure. My goal is to stay under $200, otherwise I would have rather just paid $200 for one from twoneil or something xD

On top of that, I ordered a nikon macro extension tube, and how I understand it is that there will be several 57mm ring spacers within it to get an effective distance.
This is the tutorial I've been following: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__PT7qvT8ec , it's for a vibrating 35mm adapter, but the concept is the same. He also uses 2x filters and keeps the glass inside to protect the focus screen from dust collection, and I"m wondering if it matters what type of filter those need to be..

Phew, I guess when I write it all out there's a lot more uncertainties than I thought there were :p
 
> my friend told me the achromat needs to be directly attached to my cam to work correctly

I think he meant that it should be as close to the lens as possible. It looks like your lens is already mounted, so you would just need the *stepup* adapter.

> otherwise I would have rather just paid $200 for one from twoneil

That's not such a bad idea. While a rewarding experience, there's a lot of trial and error, learning and tweeking. I wish there were something in that price range before I started building my adapter. 4 years later I'm still tweeking it. I'm looking forward to getting a gh1 with a FD lens adapter so I can use my primes. I'm still going to keep my edwierdo inspired rig for unusual music video or commercial shots, but it would have been nice not to have reinvented the wheel.

> keeps the glass inside to protect the focus screen from dust collection

Not a bad idea for a static adapter, but I'd use coated UV filters. 2x filters will add distortion, the UV filters will not. also the coating will help keep reflections down.
 
The thing is, Twoneil claims to have used the same 35mm tutorial to build his adapters as I have been using, but his adapter without the Nikon lens is already $200+ 69 if you want the plus, and then another ~$140 for the Nikon Lens, where as my total runs about $250, including the Lens, max considering everything goes well.

Speaking of which, I don't know if you're familiar with Twoneil's products, but I'm wondering what exactly the PLUS, is.. seems like a macro extension tube with some extra rings..
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top