Well more than just a few somebodies still love 'em.


YouTube - Village Kid - Munich (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp54FDBDBJg)


Techspec.


Cameras.

JVC GY-HD111.
JVC GY-HD250.


Supplemental recording system.

JVC HDV camera tapes.


Primary recording system.

Focus Enhancements DR-100


35mm adaptors.

P+S Technik Mini35-400.
P+S Technik Mini35 Compact.


Lenslist.

Nikon 14mm f2.8, Nikon 35mm f2.8, Nikon 50mm f1.4, Nikon 85mm f1.8.


Lighting including outdoors daylight key.

2.4K HMI
1.2K HMI
650watt tungsten fresnels


Camera support and motion.

P+S Skater with tripod foot cups.
Steadicam rig. ( Model I don't know.)
Handheld.
Vinten Vision 10 Fluid Head on Sachtler Sticks.


FOOTNOTE:

I think we had Paolo Ciccone's Trucolor version 3 in there as well.

Beautiful!

Hoping to pickup a used 35mm adaptor for my gy-hd200ub after my Nikon D7000 pre-order goes through. This just makes me even more excited.

Did you use the FE DR-100 just for the convenience factor or is there a quality upgrade between that and your straight to tape footage?

The file based recordings from the DR-100s are much more convenient than capturing the tapes which remain undisturbed and tail-out as the backup archive. The JVCs have always been very good as far as recordings go. I don't recall ever seeing a tape dropout but there is always that risk. The DR-100s record via the firewire. The data limitation is the same so no better picture but all else being well, less risk of dropout.

You also have the benefit of being able to record to .mov files for Final Cut (Macs) or .avi for Premiere, Vegas etc.. (PCs) On this one my instructions were that it was to be edited on Final Cut so I selected .mov files in the Firestores but it ended up being cut in Premiere. The files were converted back to .avi in Cineform's HDLink.

Tape capture from the JVCs to PC has been a bit flakey. The DR-100s might be a bit inelegant to look at as they sit sidesaddle in their weird cradles but they do the job well.

The owner of the HD250 has moved on to the HM camera family and Nano recorders.

As for the adaptors, you have to be obsessive on getting the backfocus exactly right. The only way as far as I am concerned is to use a big display and a resolution chart, set it initially with the groundglass motor stopped focus on the groundglass texture and then again with the motor running and using the resolution chart. Once you have got that sorted, then you have to be obsessive with the lens focus.

You would be amazed just how many camera operators just want to wing it and focus by eye.

If you can patch in a monitor then well and good. With or without a monitor, a siemens star on a letter or A4 sized piece of paper is your best friend plus some determination in getting people to take the time out for focus checks.

FOOTNOTE;

In case it is misinterpreted that I was high up on the creative food chain, I must point out that I was but a humble assistant-lensmonkey and switched a few lights on and off for this project.

It was a good gig, watching the setups and the steadycam operator doing his smooth thing and somehow not bowl anything over as he threaded his way through light stands and props.

Interestingly, this was shot on the Panasonic HPX-500 with a P+S Technik PRO35 adaptor on front. With all the production value adding like lighting and sets, you can see just how good groundglass work can be.

Merantau Trailer (SD) on Vimeo

There is a generous library of behind-the-scenes videos on the same vimeo site and on the rental DVD.

Problem:
Got a call the other day, a client wanted me to grab some pickup shots in a couple hours. Problem was that I've shot the entire project up to that point with a 7D & didn't have time to get my hands on one before he needed me.

Solution:
Dust off the old Letus Extreme, pull the HV20 (only thing I have that can do 24p) out of tape capture duty & go to work.

Result:
I got the shots, but MAN I missed the 7D. Sooooo much easier, no vignetting, better edge to edge sharpness, no having to worry about all the little gotchas of using an adapter & I can use it with my Merlin. Far more flexible tool, far less hassle.

Conclusion:
I should have just bought my own 7D a long time ago.
I'll keep the Letus around just for moments like this, you never know when you need a certain tool to save your bacon. More than likely it'll become a paperweight again, & in 10 years I might be able to sell it for decent $$ when they're considered retro, cool, or quaint.

Yes it's a hassle to use this adapters BUT in no way is the 7D or any other dlsr for that matter a replacement. Cmos skew, aliasing, form factor, acquisition codec, zebras, waveform, etc. etc. Even with the new cameras coming out (AF100 and F3) I'm still going to buy probably a new adapter. Even this new cameras have cmos related problems. I for one can't stand looking at skewed video. I'm allergic to it!

Sorry, don't wanna derail this topic. It just warms me up when somebody mentions this dslrs as a professional tool.

Anyway the Merantau trailer looks nice despite the bad rez...

For sake of interest, this is a grab from the prototype Cinevate varifocal relay/Brevis/SI2K. I'm waiting for a CF1 diffuser before doing furthur tests.

I agree with Sanjin, there is no replacement for 35mm adapters for professional use on cameras shooting 4:2:2. DSLR makes many compromises to shoot 35mm films on it, which in itself I don't think is worth it. But if they improve over time who knows what possibilities will exist 5 years from now.

Remember the group that hacked the DVX to shoot raw out of it? That would be a cleaver feat for the DSLR era and likely give RED a run for the money.

What about Sony F3 ? Doesn't this alter the equation, also $-wise ?

The Sony is not out yet, and it has some serious design problems. I will stick with my EX3, Letus, NanoFlash until the Sony F5 comes out.

I just shot this with the above combination. The Nighttime shots were done with a Canon 5D2.

YouTube - 1791 Diamonds Engagement Rings (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pDY1oauraE)

I would definitely consider the F3 over the AF100 due to being a more proper industry standard as far as sensor. So many decisions to make, and definitely some difficult ones ahead !

Just watched a movie titled "Kandahar Break" and recommend it.


The behind-the-scenes featurettes indicate the camera was a 2/3" video of some type, Sony possibly but the images were of apparent 35mm format.

Then in one short shot with some hard sky as backdrop, there was the signature of a P+S Technik converter and a lens being set tighter than about f5.6. Otherwise the system did not draw any attention to itself, which is the way it should be. Kudos to the crew too in managing the system.

The camera was obscured by black cloth being used to keep the sun out of the monitors so I was unable to get a close enough look in the behind-the-scenes footage.


Like Merantau, also shot with a groundglass adaptor, this story was shot by a UK director and mixed Pakistani and UK crew in remote and difficult locations. There's some good stuff being done outside of the mainstream.

I will need to find those movies!

Bob I think you and I are the only ones left in this thread... haha.

I just saw a mini35 400 sell for $700 somewhere on here a couple weeks ago... I wish I could have snatched that up. I'm looking to buy one back now for "fun" since I sold mine back in 2008 when I left video to pursue 35mm still photography for a bit. Well, a lot has changed since then. Although I've owned the Canon 7D for stills since 2009, I haven't shot video on it.

I sure do miss the mini35 discussions..

I bought that Mini35 from Michael Galvan at $700! Couldn't say no at that price because I used to drool over them a few years back when they were worth thousands...

I'll have to pick your brains about these devices once I get a hold of it!

Dennis.


It's that way now that I have to regard the 35mm adaptor season as a savant period in my history. Like all good things that come, then yield their place to something new, 35mm adaptors in such a relatively short period had had their day it seems and so too, my own small moment in history as a prolific though unqualified commentator. With many coming onto the used market at discounted prices, they remain a valid tool for people who remain costed out of the new DLSRs until the first generation of those are passed on in favour of the next big thing.

However, people should not forget the validity of the purpose of the immediate ancestor, a groundglass based director's viewfinder, designed and manufactured by P+S Technik.

With an eyepiece dioptre in place of a camera, an internal framing mask, the mounting hardware replaced by a handgrip, press and hold triggerswitch and for some, a relocated battery compartment, all the image-erecting ( flip ) adaptors would be quite satisfactory as 35mm director's viewfinders for use whilst the camermen and DOPs fret and sweat over their recalcitrant DSLRs.

The existing alternative vendors might make an extra few dollars from their past adaptor sales by offering dioptres to go on back of their adaptors in place of the video cameras. - But please, no dirt-cheap single element ones that go soft in the corners, which would kill off that market very quickly.

I have a shelf full of disks, glass slides, wax, vibrating motors, and potential adapter housings that were part of my days of trying to beat the Letus, Cinevate and Redrock adapters with a rig of my own. I built a working spinner out of the Redrock workbook, using a Cinevate lens. I was almost there, I spent a lot of time doing that. I also worked on a Letus35 with improvement. I shot several shorts, and one 20 minute epic that is yet to be edited by the producer. That was a six day shoot, complete with daily crashes on the borrowed Letus flip adapter-- things like the vibrating screen stoping intermittentily with overheat or due to bad solder job, or the set screw letting go and one my my primes falling into a reflecting pool.....

I finally broke down and bought the Canon 5D when it was first out. But even there, wanting to improve on the product, I started working with the Magic Lantern crew to get the camera more film worthy.

I actually am glad I can buy the Canon T3i or the GH2 for less that I could buy one of the better adapters in the "olden days". I doubt seriously whether I could ever have gotten the images out of my DIY attempts that these cameras can give. Yes, there are issues, but then, I still cringe at the frozen grain pattern that was streaking through some of my films with those 35mm adapters.

If I get off my backside, bother to go buy a lotto ticket and my cargo plane comes home and brings moderately valuable good things for the people, I would be tempted to buy a Sony F3.

Alas I need to pull my head in, cull my wishlist of indulgences and live within my means.

I was able to get the Letus Extreme working well but there was always that nagging doubt, will it see out the production or lay down. As it was, it never did die and I had no troubles with it.

Dennis Wood's Cinevate Brevis looks good on the SI2K with the Cinevate varifocal relay. The practical reality is giving up some ease of operation on what is already a heavy camera, when the integrated camera/record unit is used. Super16 ultra primes get you much of what you want in sensible shallow depths-of-field anyway.

The original two flip AGUS35s I built from plumbers pipe and endcaps are now in the shed in a plastic storage box. I wonder if I can persuade the museum to take them.

"Those were the days my friend,
I thought they'd never end---"

Now that shows my age doesn't it?

Locals honing their action genre skills. The guys are getting more adventurous with each project.


They used a Letus Extreme and Sony PMW-EX1. The overlay scene with the girls watching the video I think was likely shot with a Canon 7D that one of the crew bought after the initial action shoot. Their subsequent projects have been done with the digital SLRs.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-rNu81402A

YouTube - Surfaced Teaser (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5gsaFs-pDQ)


Grabs ex-facebook.

Here is a link to a website for "Bellflower", an indie movie which screened at Sundance. It was shot on what appears to be and one would have to describe as, the mother of all groundglass adaptors.

It looks like it might be based on large format plate camera imaging and we thought Ted Ramasola and others were going a bit extreme with medium format developments. Large format camera tech brackets across two centuries.

Coatwolf (http://coatwolf.com/news/)

From a historical sentimentalist standpoint, the camera they used ( very early SI2K by the look of it ) and the alternative 35mm groundglass based adaptors, had their kickoff here on this very forum as did the RED system.

I don't know what waits around the corner in five years time, of a semi-opensource flavour but assuredly, the chances of it being discussed and matured on this site will be pretty good.

Here is another movie, made on a low budget with a guerilla cast and crew and EX3 and Letus Ultimate adaptor.

The title is "MONSTERS". It is in DVD release and the extras are worth a look. The website is here :-

MONSTERS THE MOVIE (http://www.monstersthemovie.com/)

I have been a bit remiss in not doing this sooner but have been waiting for a suitable poroject to come along. A little 3 minute movie will happen in a pine forest in the next four weeks or so.

There's lots of linear texture in the trees and ground litter which would provoke moire and lots of movement which will provoke rolling shutter and lots of contrast likely needing deep dynamic range. The 35mm "look" is desired. The budget is near to zero. Don't we here in the west like to punish ourselves.

So chasing for the best of all worlds, we will be giving the SI2K plus Cinevate Brevis and Dennis's prototype varifocal relay a try.

Here's a few location scouting stills for "Professional Hero" a 3 minute medieval short being directed by Matt Barron in Western Australia.

Still minding up on whether to do it on the SI2K on a 35mm adaptor or direct-to-camera or with the EX1/Letus these frames were shot on. - I don't have a digital stills camera. The groundglass motor was not switched on. I also have not done an alignment on the groundglass since I cleaned it last, hence the softness in right side of frame.

An ample illustation of why you don't hire me as an operator, short sight and needing close-up glasses which I had left behind. The SI2K spoils you as it has a sharpness by printed numbers focus readout which you can call up on the screen.

Yes it's a hassle to use this adapters BUT in no way is the 7D or any other dlsr for that matter a replacement. Cmos skew, aliasing, form factor, acquisition codec, zebras, waveform, etc. etc. Even with the new cameras coming out (AF100 and F3) I'm still going to buy probably a new adapter. Even this new cameras have cmos related problems. I for one can't stand looking at skewed video. I'm allergic to it!

Sorry, don't wanna derail this topic. It just warms me up when somebody mentions this dslrs as a professional tool.

Anyway the Merantau trailer looks nice despite the bad rez...

I use a Canon 7D and t2i, but I feel the same way. Particularly for camera-tracking / effects applications (even with care in camera movement). In these cases, rolling shutter skew really messes things up.

I miss CCDs, but CMOS sensors are cheap, so we're seeing lots and lots of 'em.

At any rate, I feel that skew and moire are the biggest reasons to opt for DOF adapter + small-chip CCD camera. ;)

I would like very much for them not to be dead... particularly since I bought one new about six months ago. Since then, I have become aware of some of the limitations, and I hope that a veteran here might be able to help me. I shoot with a JVC GY HD200u, which is a 3ccd 1/3" shoulder-mount. I have the Letus Ultimate and Letus 1/3" short relay lens.

My problem: how do I minimize the vignette? I find it extremely distracting all the time, but particularly when shooting indoors, and particularly when introducing camera movement (when the image is still, the eye doesn't seem to pick up on the fall-off as easily). I am using old Nikon still lenses, formulated for film--is that the problem? I know that they were made for lower resolution specs...

I can't just zoom in past the vignette, because the relay lens is fixed. Has anybody else dealt with this?

Finn.


Could you advise which Nikon lenses you are using.

Anything which is no faster ( lower aperture numbers ) than f2.8 may be likely to vignette. Also, did you buy in the Ultimate together with the 1/3" relay as a kit or separately.

I use a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor prime, and a wide (20-35) and telephoto (80-200) zoom of the same era (c. 1990) that are both f/2.8

I did buy the relay lens from Letus together with the Ultimate.

This one is counfounding me a bit. The vignette I would expect from f2.8 zooms as these typically have a small exit pupil on the back. However if you are getting this from the 50mm f1.4 there is something else at play. Unfortunately I have not had my greasy hands on the direct 1/3" relay for the JVC GY-HD*** camera family. I only ever set it up with the stock Fujinon which was an awkward arrangement.

With the 1/3" relay lens removed, is there in back of the Letus Ultimate, what looks like a magnifying lens or is there a flat glass surface which is the rear face of a prism inside of a rectangular frame?

My understanding is that the direct relay lens may be able to view the groundglass through the adaptor prism path without need of an achromatic dioptre between the relay lens and the prism. If this is the case, then the extra dioptre in the path would complicate matters and perhaps expand the view of the groundlgass and include the vignette from the Nikon lenses which might not otherwise be apparent. However I cannot be sure of this.

A means of checking would be to take the relay lens off the back of the Ultimate, mount the relay lens on the camera, position a focus target, a piece of paper with gridlines drawn across a 24mm square on it about 7-8" from the camera focal plane and check if sharp focus can be had through the relay lens onto this target. If there can, then likely there is no need for an achromatic dioptre in back of the Letus Ultimate.

In this state the target will appear upside-down.

The Letus Extreme/Elite/Ultimate from my vague recall, provided in the kit for fixed lens cameras, an approx 4+ power achromatic dioptre to enable close focus on the groundglass.


If there is an achromatic dioptre in backof the Letus Ultimate and yet viewing directly through the relay lens onto a target without the Letus on front of the camera and you can get a sharp image from the target, then the next step is to remove that achromatic dioptre from the back of the Letus Ultimate, assemble the relay lens plus camera back onto the rear of the Letus Ultimate with the Achromatic dioptre now not in the path and see if you can get a sharp focus on the groundglass and an adequately sized frame of the image conveyed onto the groundglass by your Nikon lenses without the groundlgass texture being too apparent.

That achromatic dioptre is a bit delicate and tricky to deal with. The glass compound element looks like it is bonded by UV cure adhesive or a two-part hard adhesive like aradlite or similar into its threaded rim. If you shockload or distort the screw-in rim the glass is mounted into, there is a risk of cracking or spalling the edge of that lens which will ruin it.

The best method to remove that dioptre is to use the proper Rolyn spanner and tips which fit. You could make up a simple plate wrench but take care that there is a small arch in centre of the wrench to clear the surface of the glass so you dont gouge or scratch it and tape over the edge of the plate wrench to the full width of the rim so that it does not slip across and scratch the glass. Do not use two screwdrivers and a torque bar to turn them. They will be too uncontrollable. Most definitely do NOT use a screwdriver and hammer method to chisel the rim to unscrew it. The shockloads will ruin both the achromatic dioptre, the small subprisms of the compound prism and even the groundglass disk.

Here is a link to a clip related to the Letus Extreme which is similar but not identical to the Ultimate. The clip gives you a look inside the guts of the prism enclosure which is near identical. I had modified this one for x-y axis adjustment. Your Ultimate has x-y-z axis adjustment built-in. A short shot shows me removing the rear achromatic dioptre with a Rolyn spanner.

ROIDING THE EXTREME. - ADDED LATERAL CENTERING ADJUSTMENT. By Bob Hart On ExposureRoom (http://exposureroom.com/members/DARANGULAFILM/27cc38a6dcf14c319efb07bb39e69a48/)

Both are near identical from the rear to the front of the prism enclosure. Do not attempt to dismantle the front off your Ultimate. You will only ruin it because it is too tricky for the average punter to tackle.

Before you go screwing and spannering, maybe try this test first. Set the relay lens iris to its widest aperture, as in lowest number and use the Nikon lens iris only for controlling light. If this makes the vignette go away then you might have to opt for ND filters on front of the Nikons with a mattebox to control overexposure.

That is fantastic information. Thank you!
So: Those images above were both taken with the 20-35 f/2.8
Is it a characteristic of f/2.8 that creates the vignette, or a characteristic of it being a zoom lens? Because f/2.8 is pretty fast.

Below is an image taken with the 50mm. The vignette is not as extreme, but it's still there.

Regarding the diopter, I read somewhere that on a fixed-lens camera, vignetting could be worsened by omitting the diopter. I do have one, BUT: the relay lens is built so that it protrudes into the body of the Letus, into the space that the diopter occupies. So the two seem to be mutually exclusive.

EDIT:

I just spoke with Letus, and they told me that there's no getting around vignette with wide-angle lenses without using an academy frame relay or zooming in (which is sort of ironic, since the wide-angles are why we NEED adapters in the first place, but never mind). I'm sending it in for service to see if they can iron it out a little.

In the meantime, the few of you who are still using adapters instead of DSLRs can watch a very short documentary we shot with both a Letus on the JVC GY-HD200u and Canon Mark II here: http://earthhouseproductions.com/filmography/ministry_of_the_stove/
I recommend blowing it up to fill the screen (but then, I would).

See if you can tell which is which!

And, to bring the topic back from my personal problems to the question "are 35mm adapters dead," that video won a cash prize at a small film festival recently. While I can't exactly say that the Letus was responsible for the win, it didn't hurt. I took the Mark II to a sawmill last week and came back with almost nothing useable because of the vibration on the cutting platform combined with the rolling shutter. And I thought I was saving time by NOT packing my JVC/Letus rig. So--personally, I don't think it's "dead," maybe just "overpriced."

It would seem that the relay lens itself has the ability for close focus. I had imagined that somehow you might have been using both the relay and the achromatic dioptre in series but you are not, so that is that out of the way.

The issue is not so much with the fastness of the lens but that in combination with the exit pupil diameter as far as I can work out. The f2.8 zooms mostly have a smaller exit pupil. It is also the tendency of wide angle lenses more so to vignette.

So at the wide end, your zooms are most likely to vignette even with iris opened up. When zoomed in, the vignette may be less apparent but a broader less dense corner brightness falloff may replace it.

So it is a general rule to use f1.4 lenses when you can get them, f1.8 lenses if you can't. The f2.8 prime lenses are starting to become a bit iffy, the longer lenses less so, the wider lenses below about 40mm are not really going to cut it.

The Letus adaptor design seeks to use as much of the groundglass area as practicable to proportionally reduce in relative scale to the image frame, the size of each groundglass "grain" pattern, which is in the ball-park of a five micron texture. It is possible for the Letus adaptors when carefully set up, to resolve sharper than the practical resolution of your camera.

I observe that your 50mm f1.4 lens image is slightly dark on one corner. If you can make sure the relay lens is dead square mounted into the rear of the Ultimate and not slightly skewed, this may go away. The Ultimate I understand has an x-y-z opitcal axis adjustment. I don't know where this is or how it works. If you can find it, trimming adjustments with this may also move the dark corner.

The lens set I settled on in the end was :-

Sigma-for-Nikon 20mm f1.8 ( adequate but a bit soft and flary wide-open ).
Nikon 28mm f1.4 ( expensive ) 28mm f2 shoud be fine, may darken in corners.
Nikon 35mm f1.4
Voigtlander-for-Nikon 40mm f2
Nikon 45mm f2.8
Nikon 50mm f1.4
Nikon 85mm f1.4
Nikon 105mm f1.8
Sigmatel-for-Nikon 135mm f1.8
Nikon 200mm f2.

I have also used a Sigma-for-Nikon 14mm f2.8 on an unmodifed Letus Extreme. On the modified Letus Extreme which conveys as much groundglass area as I can get in chasing 2K image groundglass resolution, the 14mm vignettes. However with the wider image, the field-of-view of the 20mm comes closer to the 14mm. On your Ultimate, a 14mm f2.8 may vignette, maybe not. The Sigma lens is a bit soft wide-open.

The most practical everyday core set of lenses would be :-

35mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1,4. maybe the 105mm, which is the definite portrait lens.

In an ideal world you will not be choosing these lenses just to conveniently frame the subject from a comfortable fixed point but to use their perspective characteristics as well as their depths-of-field for creative reasons.

Take heed of people like Chris Barcellos and Charles Papert when it comes to reasons for lens choice. I am far less accomplished than they in this business.

Thanks for the link to your short film. Straightforward and unadorned, a delight. I like what you did with the decending tilt reveal with the window by turning a glare problem into a creative move with the aperture pull.

As for wide shots with 35mm adaptors, it was established fairly early in the piece that groundglass adaptors were sought more for their ability to render 35mm film-style shallower depths of field for a given field of view than the bare camera lens. Early adoptors went overboard on that for a while, then began to play with the options some 35mm wide lenses conferred.

It was theorised in discussions here that it might be better to use the bare camera for the widest shots when resolution really counts to reproduce textures such as stony distant ground or foliage. From recall, I think the jury remained out on the topic and it became a matter of personal preference and style.

It is possible to achieve slightly wider fields-of-view with 35mm adaptors on some video cameras, versus the bare camera and its standard lens.

There is a it of a trade-off with all groundlgass adaptors, finer texture means more light transmission, better resolution at expense of hotspotting, vignetting and "oily" bokeh. The coarser texture yields a more filmic result but loses a lot of light and sharpness.

You can take a wider view off the coarser groundglass for less vignetting to significantly restore sharpness but lose light performance or go in closer on a finer textured groundglass to get inside the vignette and chase better light performance. The sharpness yield seems to be slightly better for the finer texture but there is not a lot in it. You lose some, you gain some. It all comes down to a balance of factors.

P+S Technik went for a 22mm wide image frame for their Mini35-400 which was the benchmark everyone was chasing. They made a very good groundglass, a reliable motion system and a very precise instrument to filmcamera technical standards.

Those of us who home-built and most of the alternative builders who went commercial with their designs opted for a groundglass that was larger than the Mini35-400 which from the outset was intended to comply closely with the 35mm motion picture film "academy" frame size and reliably yield images with no vignetting.

Those of us who went with wider adaptors accepted the trade-offs that came with chasing a wider image off the groundglass for the sharper results which could be had, even if that meant a smaller choice of lenses we could achieve consistent results with. My recall is that the commercial builder-vendors went with that choice in that it also assisted meet the higher sharpness requirements of the then upcoming 1920 x 1080 cameras like the Sony PMW-EX1 and EX3 which advanced from the 1440 x 1080 HDV standard.

The Letus Ultimate is the final developement and most mature of the Letus line of 35mm adaptors. I don't think there is much more if anything you can do to enhance it.

The fastest wide-view "affordable" used 35mm format lens I could find was the Kinoptik 9.8mm f1.8. If used on adaptors which relay a wider than academy frame off the groundglass, this lens vignettes, so yielded for me no more practically useful a field of view than the 14mm f2.8 which vignettes at a wider groundglass frame but yields a similar field of view with a softer vignette.

That is the wall groundglass adaptors seem to hit and in practical terms, 35mm motion picture film cameras as well when it comes down to lenses affordable to the likes of us.