Medium Fomat Lenses at DVinfo.net

Jason Varner · January 28th, 2006, 02:39 PM

I was just wondering if anyone out there had done any experimentation with medium format lenses. It seems to me that if you project a 60mmX60mm image on a focusing screen then static grain would become less of an issue as the particles would be relatively smaller (4X roughly) and possibly bypass the need for an oscillating adapter. I'll be the first to admit that I'm a newbie here and don't have any experience with this kind of thing. What would be the pitfalls of such a setup?

Ben Winter · January 28th, 2006, 02:56 PM

If you can afford medium format lenses, you can afford not to experiment and just buy a real setup. At least that's my understanding.

Jason Varner · January 28th, 2006, 03:11 PM

Not really. 500-1000 dollars for a good lens is fair. Spending 10000 so you can mount one is a little unbalanced. I was reading some of your other stuff about altering the Letus and I had a question? Typically how far in do you have to zoom to acheive focus and avoid vignetting. Thanks, Jason.

Ben Winter · January 28th, 2006, 04:10 PM

About a fourth of the way on the zoom bar diagram. I think the price of medium-format lenses may be scaring people off. And I'm not just talking about the Mini35, I'm referring to Dan's MPIC, which is a good bit cheaper.
and besides,

Quote:

500-1000 dollars for a good lens is fair.

I really don't think anybody who goes through the trouble of getting one of these adapters is just going to shoot with one lens. Besides, while you might call 500-1000 "fair," 100-200 is a lot "fairer."

Michael Maier · January 29th, 2006, 04:01 AM

There's somebody here who made an adapter to use with medium format lenses and a DVX100. I think he may actually sell them too, not sure. Maybe somebody will post the link. But I think besides “possibly” smaller grain, there are not really any other advantages to them. Remember that medium format lenses are not as sharp as 35mm SLR. Motion picture lenses use an even smaller frame than SLR and no D.P. that I know will ever prefer shooting with a Nikon SLR instead of a real Cine lens because of the bigger frame. So that should tell you something. Frame size is not all that counts.

Oscar Spierenburg · January 29th, 2006, 05:42 AM

MF have relatively less DOF so you'd have to consider if you want that. I don't see why they would be less sharp though. One other thing you need to know is the light loss, because the bigger frame might reduce the brightness. I know my Rolleichord absorbs too much light and can't be used (except for outdoor shots perhaps) but a Rollei build-in lens has a small aperture.
You would need a very big condenser too.
The grain is a very big advantage though.

Michael Maier · January 29th, 2006, 06:01 AM

Grain is not necessarily a bad thing.

Ted West · January 30th, 2006, 10:28 AM

Medium format lens are usually slower than 35mm lens.

January 28th, 2006, 02:39 PM	#1
Jason Varner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 119	Medium Fomat Lenses I was just wondering if anyone out there had done any experimentation with medium format lenses. It seems to me that if you project a 60mmX60mm image on a focusing screen then static grain would become less of an issue as the particles would be relatively smaller (4X roughly) and possibly bypass the need for an oscillating adapter. I'll be the first to admit that I'm a newbie here and don't have any experience with this kind of thing. What would be the pitfalls of such a setup?

January 28th, 2006, 02:56 PM	#2
Ben Winter Trustee Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 1,675 Images: 1	If you can afford medium format lenses, you can afford not to experiment and just buy a real setup. At least that's my understanding. __________________ BenWinter.com

January 28th, 2006, 03:11 PM	#3
Jason Varner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 119	Not really. 500-1000 dollars for a good lens is fair. Spending 10000 so you can mount one is a little unbalanced. I was reading some of your other stuff about altering the Letus and I had a question? Typically how far in do you have to zoom to acheive focus and avoid vignetting. Thanks, Jason.

January 29th, 2006, 04:01 AM	#5
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	There's somebody here who made an adapter to use with medium format lenses and a DVX100. I think he may actually sell them too, not sure. Maybe somebody will post the link. But I think besides “possibly” smaller grain, there are not really any other advantages to them. Remember that medium format lenses are not as sharp as 35mm SLR. Motion picture lenses use an even smaller frame than SLR and no D.P. that I know will ever prefer shooting with a Nikon SLR instead of a real Cine lens because of the bigger frame. So that should tell you something. Frame size is not all that counts.

January 29th, 2006, 05:42 AM	#6
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	MF have relatively less DOF so you'd have to consider if you want that. I don't see why they would be less sharp though. One other thing you need to know is the light loss, because the bigger frame might reduce the brightness. I know my Rolleichord absorbs too much light and can't be used (except for outdoor shots perhaps) but a Rollei build-in lens has a small aperture. You would need a very big condenser too. The grain is a very big advantage though.

January 29th, 2006, 06:01 AM	#7
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	Grain is not necessarily a bad thing.

January 30th, 2006, 10:28 AM	#8
Ted West New Boot Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 8	Medium format lens are usually slower than 35mm lens.