FORUMS: list search recent posts

??Shallow Depth of Field??

COW Forums : Panasonic Cameras

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Eric Cannon
??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 21, 2008 at 10:35:46 pm

OK... This would probably be a great Cinematography forum posts, but since i want to keep everything specific to the HVX200a, im putting it in here.

I just got an HVX200a, and yes, it is the right camera for all my needs. I was just wondering about some DoF stuff with it. Obviously it's a prosumer camera so it is possible to achieve shallow DoF to an extent, but i was wondering about potentially enhancing my range with it. Now ive used and messed around with Letus and Red Rock adapters before, and i think they're great, but i dont like the bulk and(realistically) i dont have the cash to be spending on an adapter and primes. Now i know that Century and similar companies make MANY different telephoto and wide angle adapters for the HVX.

THE MAIN QUESTION:
Can i achieve a similar/same range in my depth of field by owning all of the Century adapters available for the HVX as i would with a REd Rock adapter and some lenses?

and/or

What makes the Letus/Red Rock 35 route better than having a bunch of century lens adapters?

"None but ourselves can free our minds"


Return to posts index

Noah Kadner
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 21, 2008 at 10:39:31 pm

Try this:

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/193/872740

-Noah

My FCP Blog. Unlock the secrets of the DVX100, HVX200 and Apple Color and Win a Free Letus Extreme.
Now featuring the Sony EX1 Guidebook, DVD Studio Pro and Sound for Film and TV.
http://www.callboxlive.com


Return to posts index

Eric Cannon
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 21, 2008 at 10:43:26 pm

Cool post... Way off my question since i already know that stuff, but cool post.

Now back to the issue... DoF with Century adapters vs Letus/Red Rock micro?

Pros Cons

"None but ourselves can free our minds"


Return to posts index


Noah Kadner
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 22, 2008 at 3:02:23 am

The Century's don't really compare at to real cinema primes IMHO, both in price or performance. So it really comes down to what you can afford. If you have the dough- get cinema lenses. Night and day with what is possible with the Century adaptors.

Noah

My FCP Blog. Unlock the secrets of the DVX100, HVX200 and Apple Color and Win a Free Letus Extreme.
Now featuring the Sony EX1 Guidebook, DVD Studio Pro and Sound for Film and TV.
http://www.callboxlive.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 22, 2008 at 1:12:07 am

[Eric Cannon] "What makes the Letus/Red Rock 35 route better than having a bunch of century lens adapters"

The 35mm glass on the front of the adaptor. The Century lenses simply screw on to the front on your existing lens and it won't change the depth of field as effectively as a nice fixed lens will.

You have to understand how these adaptors work. Basically, the light comes in through the front of the lens and gets focused on a sometimes spinning, sometimes oscillating, sometimes fixed piece of high quality glass in the adaptor itself. The HVX200 then records that image off of the glass through its own fixed lens. The 35mm lenses provide a fixed depth of field (if using fixed lenses) and a varying depth if using some sort of telephoto lens.

You should have a look at Brevis adaptor as well, made by Cinevate. It's very affordable.

You can rent lenses, even still camera lenses for very cheap. It might help push you through until you can afford the lenses you want. Also, check EBay/Cragislist/and yard sales for 35mm still lenses. You can sometimes find GREAT deals.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Eric Cannon
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 22, 2008 at 3:10:08 am

My confusion is aroused at the fact that(i could be wrong) both types of adapters are being shot through the HVX's fixed lens... The Brevis/RedRock/Letus adapters dont bypass the HVX fixed lens, do they?

"None but ourselves can free our minds"


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 22, 2008 at 3:25:55 am

*Edited

[Eric Cannon] " both types of adapters are being shot through the HVX's fixed lens..."

Yes and no. I'll explain in a bit.


[Eric Cannon] "The Brevis/RedRock/Letus adapters dont bypass the HVX fixed lens, do they?"

No.

Okay let me explain this differently. Think of the 35mm adaptors as a very very small projector of sorts. The light comes in through the 35mm lens and gets projected on to a small piece of glass inside the adaptor. SInce that glass is transparent, you can see this projection on that other side of that small piece of glass (think of a rear projection screen). Then, the HVX200 records the image off of that projected image. So, since the 35mm lenses have fixed focal lengths or shorter focal lengths then fixed lens video cameras, the depth of field is increased. Does that make better sense?

See this page for reference then click on the 'Launch 3D View' button on the bottom and you will see what I am talking about:

http://cinevate.com/website/brevisdemo/

The Century lenses simply screw on to the front of the HVX and use the optics of the HVX so you are then 'limited' to functions of the HVX lens.

The tips that Noah gave you in the other thread he linked to are very good ones, by the way.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Rennie Klymyk
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 23, 2008 at 12:26:32 am

The reason you have different dof with different formats is all physics. If your lead actor is 6' tall and you are shooting a 35mm camera, his 6' image passes through the lens, all light rays intersect at the focal point and they fall on the chip in focus in what is called the image circle. So there he is, all 6' of him standing on the 35mm size chip. If you put down the Red and pick up the HVX200a and frame the same shot you need to capture the same 6' actor onto a 1/3" chip or image circle and this extra shrinking down of the focused image is where the dof changes. 6" guy onto a 35mm frame vs a 6" guy onto a 1/3" frame, you've really reduced that image circle and altered the real world spacialality (new word) where this 6' actor actually exists.

Here is a diagram and more of an explanation.

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/99/856583

DOF.


"thou can not stir a flower without crumbling a star" ......Henry Wadsworth Longfellow


Return to posts index

Eric Cannon
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 23, 2008 at 8:41:05 pm

Some really good responses, thanks... Still not positive how the tech specs of the 35mm adapters actually works out since chips size is the same, but overall im starting to get a better idea.

"None but ourselves can free our minds"


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 23, 2008 at 8:56:14 pm

Hey Eric.

Remember, you are recording a projection of the 35mm lens with it's depth of field (or lack there of) and how it 'sees' the image which is what Rennie talked about. The HVX is just recording that projection.

Did you look at the picture I linked to? You can really see what the HVX is recording there.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Rennie Klymyk
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 23, 2008 at 8:58:30 pm

Basically the dof is that of the 35mm format because the 35mm lenses used, throw the image on the devices imager or ground glass surface which is 35mm size. Between this 35mm ground glass surface and the HVX200 is a special macro lens that allows the camera to focus on this ground glass surface which is only as physically deep as the minute surface thickness where the image is cast. Almost no depth of field is needed from the camera as the image it is capturing is paper thin. The camera is not capturing the original scene it is capturing the projected image from the 35 mm adapter and that image benefits from the 35mm dof characteristics.

I have always been skeptical of anything you put between a scene and the recording device other than the necessary lens. In these cases your camera is actually filming a tiny image projected on a 35mm sized imager, which is a secondary image. However these dof adapters have proven themselves as to produce good enough HD imagery to make it into feature films for large screen projection.

Hope this helps.

"thou can not stir a flower without crumbling a star" ......Henry Wadsworth Longfellow


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 23, 2008 at 9:01:15 pm

[Rennie Klymyk] "However these dof adapters have proven themselves as to produce good enough HD imagery to make it into feature films for large screen projection. "

They are quite amazing.


Return to posts index


Eric Cannon
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 23, 2008 at 9:39:22 pm

Ok
It finally clicked!
Thanks

Not the same quality, but 'similar' to shooting an HD image of a good projection of an old 8mm film reel.

"None but ourselves can free our minds"


Return to posts index

Rennie Klymyk
Re: ??Shallow Depth of Field??
on Oct 23, 2008 at 9:52:21 pm

Sort of but more like an optical conversion and without the frame sync issues.

"thou can not stir a flower without crumbling a star" ......Henry Wadsworth Longfellow


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2019 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]