DVX100 Tests

[Dennis Wood]

Guys the DVX 100 with Brevis will need a +6 diopter macro (pretty weak acutally) and a 72 to 58 step down ring.

The achromats manufactured will almost certainly be +6. This is not public information

[Moises Crespo]

How soon are you going to start making them?

[Dennis Wood]

Order will go in likely this week.

[Steve Strickland]

I did a test with the cheap macro set I got off Ebay. Man, you get what you pay for. The distortion on these is pretty bad. I know that +6 is the confirmed strength, but +7 seemed to get me where I needed to be. Alas, my testing was way ghetto and my framing, as you can see, was not totally on. Anyway check it out here:

http://www.savefile.com/files/2204436

The day is almost here, gentlemen.

Later,

Steve

[Rafael Lopes]

Man, the more I see tests with Macros, the more I want to stay away from them.

[Dennis Wood]

I hear you Rafael. +6 isn't too bad for CA, but sperical aberration with cheap glass is another issue.

I'm probably not going to post up the test shots...for lots of reasons, they are not representative of the adapter.

I will post up the DVX clips here.

Steve, I'll check that clip tonight.

[Rafael Lopes]

Rock and Roll, Dennis! Footage is always wellcome to keep us on our toes

[Brandon Rice]

When are you getting that footage up Dennis?

[Dennis Wood]

Here's a quick clip from the DVX using a +2 and +4 cheapy macro. I didn't shoot this...the film student did. I'm not sure if they're trained to film's latitude, but if you ask me, it's overexposed.

http://www.savefile.com/files/6494689

What do you guys think? The DVX footage definitely has a more "organic" feel to it.

[Joshua Nitschke]

Very overexposed, but it looks nice.

I can't wait to have this with a quality achromat.

[Moises Crespo]

Same here.

[Aram Bauman]

What were the settings on the DVX?
I think there was too much contrast and over exposed in those shots to tell anything. You have to up the sharpening and detail level on the DVX with 35mm adapters to get a nice image.

[Brandon Rice]

Yeah, WAY overexposed, but looks good! I will be shooting my friend's short for school with the cheapo macros. He can't wait till' we get the achromat. I'll be properly lighting, and exposing it (I hope), so we can get a better idea of what can be done with this awesome adapter.

[Dennis Wood]

You know, most of Mikey's shots were like that. He's the film student, and was nice enough to lug the cams, so I didn't say anything. I'm a pretty big believer in the zebras...and I use them.

No idea on the DVX settings...it was a very quick test, just to determine macro strength. My sense is that the CA on a +6 isn't too bad.

[Rafael Lopes]

It's hard to tell the quality. Like everyone said it's too overexposed. Personaly I always like to anaylse footage on human subjects. The shot of the closet doors seems to have a weird kind of grain and it looks a little softer than the shots from the gs400. I think it must be the macros.

[Mathieu Bergeron]

Like Rafael said, it's hard to say...

There is little vignetting on the corners and from shot 2, there is obvious distortion. Maybe it is from the 35mm lens. It would be interesting to shoot with and without macro (even if the frame don't match).

[Dennis Wood]

The vignetting is just the fact that we didn't zoom in to cover overscan. Other than light falloff, you'll find that the "dreaded" vignette, is just a result of not zooming in on the GG enough. What looks good on the cam's LCD, is not enough. If it was going to DVD, you could leave it, and no one would ever see it. Online video is different though, as there is no "safe" area.

My 50mm does show some barrel distortion...I have a 28-70 that shows none. It could be the macros, but I know from charts that the Minolta F1.4 does have some barrel distortion.

None of the footage through the cheap macros is as good as the GS400 stuff..even on the XL2, and DVX. Tomorrow I'll have 16:9 24P from the HVX, no macros, so you'll have a very good idea on the image quality from a full frame progressive image.

[Francois Poitras]

I think the problem with the first shot is not one of overexposure as much as one of scene selection. When doing a rack focus, it’s normal to adjust camera exposure on the less exposed object/subject. But rack focusing between two areas that are so far apart in terms of illumination is asking for problems...

But yes, I’d also say the second shot is also a bit overexposed.

[Dennis Wood]

I am still puzzled as to Mikey's exposure selection. I tend to expose for the bright areas, and add light to the dark. A lot of the camera footage is "blown out" and one of the reasons I didn't post it. I did make a "how do you enable zebras on that cam" type comment..but the hint went unnoticed.

What I'll do tomorrow is do some deliberate barrel distortion shots to show the differences between 35mm lenses. I will be shooting with the HVX, along with the director of the film school. We should get some really nice footage.

[Rafael Lopes]

good news, Den!