35mm Adapter Static Aldu35

James Webb · April 15th, 2004, 08:06 PM

http://homepage.mac.com/dvx100/PhotoAlbum2.html

Gerald Lee · April 15th, 2004, 11:20 PM

Looks great! Could you post some full resolution shots with the camera?

James Webb · April 16th, 2004, 12:21 AM

Thanks!

Here's some images:
http://homepage.mac.com/dvx100/PhotoAlbum3.html

Joe Holt · April 16th, 2004, 05:46 AM

Looks great James!
Just a few questions...

Are you using the original DVX100 or the "A"?

I could see some grain in your blacks (that's where you're going to see it), but I didn't see any vignetting. Are you zoomed into a smaller than 36mm x 26mm image? I thought most DVX100 users were using +7 diopters instead of the x10 you're showing in your diagram photo. Have you tried using just adding a +2 to one of your 5x? It could be that I don't know what I'm talking about as I don't have a DVX100 but am interested because I plan on getting one to replace my Sony soon.

With my Sony, I zoom out until I start to see vignetting and then I tap the zoom lever just a pinch to get the largest image possible without vignetting. Can you do that with your DVX100 or do you have to keep the camera wide with the macro adapters?

Keep forging ahead. There are lots of us eager to see your results. The DVX100's Cinelook color technology coupled with the 35mm DOF should make a very impressive combination.

Joe

Richard Mellor · April 16th, 2004, 06:11 AM

your aldu35 was made the same as mine I think this is the best design .I sent chris some photos of the rig . my filter rings are 52mm a 50 mm plcx fits inside. it is fitted with the internal threaded filter ring washer this also is used to hold the ground glass. and to get the just right focal length the washer can be used as a spacer . a local camera store had a bin of scratched
filters, and a cannon 50mm 1.4 lens.... thanks to everyone
it looks so simple now ,but it took a lot of work by a lot of people
to get to this point. I wish i new a place that I could tell people
to buy blank filter rings for 2 or 3 dollars .some factory has to make these things

Dana Jan · April 16th, 2004, 11:01 AM

Wow James! That looks REALLY clean! nice build! I was wondering if you were planning on building any sort of rails system to support the weight of the 50mm lens way out there? Is it pretty heavy that far from the DVX front mount?

You're really tempting me to go out and buy the DVX this weekend (I can't as I'm in the middle of getting a mortgage loan) hehe. But damn am I tempted to start my static 35 project after seeing your results and your approach!

The screen grabs you posted look great to me!

What was the total cost of your setup (minus the lens)?

Thanks!
-Dana

James Webb · April 16th, 2004, 02:48 PM

Joe-
I'm actually using (2) X10 macros. That was suggested by Brett Erskine. My camera is a 1st generation DVX100 with 190 hours on it. I haven't checked to see where I'm at in relation to 36mm x 26mm. I plan to this weekend. I can say this to those familiar with the DVX, I was zoomed in to Z60 @MF06 (if that helps). I can zoom out to Z47 before I start seeing the barrel creeping in the corners. But at that point it appears that "shadowing" is still present on the sides. So to be sure I got a very clean image without any vignetting I zoomed to Z60.

Richard-
The filter rings method is very solid (and strong). I had to buy them for $5-$7 each. I got a few for free. I ended up using too different thicknesses of rings. A certain combination of both were necessary to get just the right length. A trial and error method ;) I decided to glue the lens on. I glued on the (silver) lens mount from the camera body to the lens as well. It made for a secure fit if I glued the lens to that before glueing it in the step-up ring. Of course it also had to be figured into the measurement of the focal length.

Dana-
The lens is very heavy (and strong). As you can see in the QT, I was holding it and pulling focus - it was pretty unmanageable. Something will eventually have to be done to accomodate it. I haven't counted up the receipts yet. I bought some things that I ended up not using too. Like (2) very nice 55mm Raynox Tube Extensions. They were slightly too long for the focal length of my lens.

I mentioned earlier that the lens was a 50mm - it's a 52mm. Not a lens of choice, just one I had.

Thanks guys!

Brett Erskine · April 16th, 2004, 04:14 PM

James I see you have been paying attention in class. Thanks for the credit. Its always nice to get something back after putting in soooo much work on this thread and in my design. Besides the idea of using two Hoya +10 Macros (Watch out. My heads about to get big) I also proposed the idea of using condensers instead of fresnels, ACHROMATIC close up diaopters instead of single element diopters and thoughs 72mm to 55mm step down rings but dont worry I promise I won't sue ;-)

I do have to give you major credit on finding just the right combo of filter rings to achieve the proper distance between the 35mm lens and the GG. I didnt think this was going to be possible because if your off by even a millimeter all of your focus marks on your 35mm lens wont be accurate, or even worse, you lose your minimum focus or the ability to focus at infinity. I went with the idea of a adjustable extention tube to not only make sure it was right but allow me to use more than one manufactures lenses (the extreme difference between cine and photo lenses)

Please post your findings on what frame size your capturing. Also I might recommend that if the glue idea doesnt hold up with the longer lenses do what I did. Take a filter stacker and mount your lens mount to it. Drill a clean diameter hole in the filter stacker for the light to pass thru. Now you have the abilty to fit just about any lens you can think off on your adapter. Theres other things you can do too to add more features/abilities to a homemade adapter but the rest are just butter. Good job.

Hey check your fous marks to make sure you got it right. If your close you might be able to grind off one or two threads on one of your filter rings and you should be there.

Brett Erskine
Director of Photography
Premiere Visions
www.CinematographerReels.com

James Webb · April 17th, 2004, 12:16 PM

Thanks Brett!

That means a lot coming from the man who taught me (almost) everything I know ;)

I'm not sure how to measure exactly what the dimensions (in millimeters) are of the capture on the GG, but I did a test to show what the lens is seeing.

http://homepage.mac.com/dvx100/PhotoAlbum4.html

James Webb · April 17th, 2004, 09:16 PM

Brett,
Also, concerning the correctness of the distance from the GG to the lens and the markings on the lens, I'd say it's pretty damn close. I guess I just happened to find the magical number. You're absolutely right - if it's off by the tiniest bit, the lens will appear not to focus correctly. I found that by focusing on "infinity" I could estimate the length easier. If the image was sharp with the lens focused on infinity (say something across the street), all the numbers seemed to be accurate. But then again I haven't measured to be certain.

Richard Mellor · April 18th, 2004, 09:53 AM

Brett -- Thank you for the tip. You are so right; I went back in and fine-tuned the distance to the ground glass, and it got sharper! The best part is that the threaded filter washers can be slowly threaded to achieve what I'm sure is a 1mm adjustment. Once the distance is achieved, tighten it up, and it works perfectly I also did this on the infinity setting.

I can't wait to put the anamorphic lens back on this fine tuned aldu35. I also built this with the condenser lens that you knew would work. It has a focal length of 1. The macro that I made before this was 'sub par'. I could not have made this without your optical skill ... the trial and error would have been endless!

Justin Burris · April 19th, 2004, 01:12 PM

I have a few questions:

1. A few times I have heard people say that the grain on the GG becomes pronounced around f4 and above. Is this f4 on the camcorder, or f4 on the SLR lens?

2. What is a "threaded filter washer"?

3. James, do you have a condenser that came in a 55mm filter ring, or did you rig that together somehow?

4. James, in the picture of your rig, the rings that are marked "spacers", are these just filters that you popped the glass out of, or what?

5. I have to imagine that all of you out there who ground your own glass have a bunch of Aluminum Oxide grit left over. Would anyone be willing to sell me what you have left for a percentage of what you paid? It just seems so wasteful to buy a bunch of this stuff, then only use just a little. I'd be happy to take it off your hands.

Thanks everybody.

Ari Shomair · April 19th, 2004, 06:39 PM

Justin; I bought WAY to much aluminum oxide. I have WAO 5 micron, some 25 and some 9.

If anyone else in Canada is looking for some aluminum oxide I can sell some to you as well; I got hit with unexpected duties which equaled my purchase price when I bought this stuff, as it was shipped via FedEx from the USD. Wouldn't want that to happen to others as well.

Alain Dumais · April 19th, 2004, 07:37 PM

----Is this f4 on the camcorder, or f4 on the SLR lens? -------

That'S F4 on the SLR.

James Webb · April 19th, 2004, 08:19 PM

Justin-

The condensor is a X1 macro 55mm. It seems to work. I still plan to eventually replace it with an actual PCX lens.

The other rings I'm referring to as "spacers" are $5 UV filters with the glass removed (I got a couple for free).

April 15th, 2004, 08:06 PM	#676
James Webb Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 40	DVX100 - Static Adapter http://homepage.mac.com/dvx100/PhotoAlbum2.html

April 16th, 2004, 12:21 AM	#678
James Webb Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 40	DVX100 images Thanks! Here's some images: http://homepage.mac.com/dvx100/PhotoAlbum3.html

April 16th, 2004, 06:11 AM	#680
Richard Mellor Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: cambridge ma Posts: 247	aldu35 your aldu35 was made the same as mine I think this is the best design .I sent chris some photos of the rig . my filter rings are 52mm a 50 mm plcx fits inside. it is fitted with the internal threaded filter ring washer this also is used to hold the ground glass. and to get the just right focal length the washer can be used as a spacer . a local camera store had a bin of scratched filters, and a cannon 50mm 1.4 lens.... thanks to everyone it looks so simple now ,but it took a lot of work by a lot of people to get to this point. I wish i new a place that I could tell people to buy blank filter rings for 2 or 3 dollars .some factory has to make these things

April 19th, 2004, 06:39 PM	#688
Ari Shomair Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: LA, California, USA Posts: 224	I have Aluminum Oxide for sale Justin; I bought WAY to much aluminum oxide. I have WAO 5 micron, some 25 and some 9. If anyone else in Canada is looking for some aluminum oxide I can sell some to you as well; I got hit with unexpected duties which equaled my purchase price when I bought this stuff, as it was shipped via FedEx from the USD. Wouldn't want that to happen to others as well.

April 19th, 2004, 07:37 PM	#689
Alain Dumais Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Montreal Canada Posts: 86	Justin Burris ----Is this f4 on the camcorder, or f4 on the SLR lens? ------- That'S F4 on the SLR. __________________ http://www.kheops-tech.com/~ad3d/

April 15th, 2004, 11:20 PM	#677
Gerald Lee Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 64	Looks great! Could you post some full resolution shots with the camera?

April 16th, 2004, 05:46 AM	#679
Joe Holt Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Sylva, North Carolina Posts: 153	Looks great James! Just a few questions... Are you using the original DVX100 or the "A"? I could see some grain in your blacks (that's where you're going to see it), but I didn't see any vignetting. Are you zoomed into a smaller than 36mm x 26mm image? I thought most DVX100 users were using +7 diopters instead of the x10 you're showing in your diagram photo. Have you tried using just adding a +2 to one of your 5x? It could be that I don't know what I'm talking about as I don't have a DVX100 but am interested because I plan on getting one to replace my Sony soon. With my Sony, I zoom out until I start to see vignetting and then I tap the zoom lever just a pinch to get the largest image possible without vignetting. Can you do that with your DVX100 or do you have to keep the camera wide with the macro adapters? Keep forging ahead. There are lots of us eager to see your results. The DVX100's Cinelook color technology coupled with the 35mm DOF should make a very impressive combination. Joe

April 16th, 2004, 11:01 AM	#681
Dana Jan New Boot Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Irvine, CA Posts: 11	Wow James! That looks REALLY clean! nice build! I was wondering if you were planning on building any sort of rails system to support the weight of the 50mm lens way out there? Is it pretty heavy that far from the DVX front mount? You're really tempting me to go out and buy the DVX this weekend (I can't as I'm in the middle of getting a mortgage loan) hehe. But damn am I tempted to start my static 35 project after seeing your results and your approach! The screen grabs you posted look great to me! What was the total cost of your setup (minus the lens)? Thanks! -Dana

April 16th, 2004, 02:48 PM	#682
James Webb Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 40	Joe- I'm actually using (2) X10 macros. That was suggested by Brett Erskine. My camera is a 1st generation DVX100 with 190 hours on it. I haven't checked to see where I'm at in relation to 36mm x 26mm. I plan to this weekend. I can say this to those familiar with the DVX, I was zoomed in to Z60 @MF06 (if that helps). I can zoom out to Z47 before I start seeing the barrel creeping in the corners. But at that point it appears that "shadowing" is still present on the sides. So to be sure I got a very clean image without any vignetting I zoomed to Z60. Richard- The filter rings method is very solid (and strong). I had to buy them for $5-$7 each. I got a few for free. I ended up using too different thicknesses of rings. A certain combination of both were necessary to get just the right length. A trial and error method ;) I decided to glue the lens on. I glued on the (silver) lens mount from the camera body to the lens as well. It made for a secure fit if I glued the lens to that before glueing it in the step-up ring. Of course it also had to be figured into the measurement of the focal length. Dana- The lens is very heavy (and strong). As you can see in the QT, I was holding it and pulling focus - it was pretty unmanageable. Something will eventually have to be done to accomodate it. I haven't counted up the receipts yet. I bought some things that I ended up not using too. Like (2) very nice 55mm Raynox Tube Extensions. They were slightly too long for the focal length of my lens. I mentioned earlier that the lens was a 50mm - it's a 52mm. Not a lens of choice, just one I had. Thanks guys!

April 16th, 2004, 04:14 PM	#683
Brett Erskine Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Anaheim, CA Posts: 445	James I see you have been paying attention in class. Thanks for the credit. Its always nice to get something back after putting in soooo much work on this thread and in my design. Besides the idea of using two Hoya +10 Macros (Watch out. My heads about to get big) I also proposed the idea of using condensers instead of fresnels, ACHROMATIC close up diaopters instead of single element diopters and thoughs 72mm to 55mm step down rings but dont worry I promise I won't sue ;-) I do have to give you major credit on finding just the right combo of filter rings to achieve the proper distance between the 35mm lens and the GG. I didnt think this was going to be possible because if your off by even a millimeter all of your focus marks on your 35mm lens wont be accurate, or even worse, you lose your minimum focus or the ability to focus at infinity. I went with the idea of a adjustable extention tube to not only make sure it was right but allow me to use more than one manufactures lenses (the extreme difference between cine and photo lenses) Please post your findings on what frame size your capturing. Also I might recommend that if the glue idea doesnt hold up with the longer lenses do what I did. Take a filter stacker and mount your lens mount to it. Drill a clean diameter hole in the filter stacker for the light to pass thru. Now you have the abilty to fit just about any lens you can think off on your adapter. Theres other things you can do too to add more features/abilities to a homemade adapter but the rest are just butter. Good job. Hey check your fous marks to make sure you got it right. If your close you might be able to grind off one or two threads on one of your filter rings and you should be there. Brett Erskine Director of Photography Premiere Visions www.CinematographerReels.com

April 17th, 2004, 12:16 PM	#684
James Webb Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 40	Thanks Brett! That means a lot coming from the man who taught me (almost) everything I know ;) I'm not sure how to measure exactly what the dimensions (in millimeters) are of the capture on the GG, but I did a test to show what the lens is seeing. http://homepage.mac.com/dvx100/PhotoAlbum4.html

April 17th, 2004, 09:16 PM	#685
James Webb Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 40	Brett, Also, concerning the correctness of the distance from the GG to the lens and the markings on the lens, I'd say it's pretty damn close. I guess I just happened to find the magical number. You're absolutely right - if it's off by the tiniest bit, the lens will appear not to focus correctly. I found that by focusing on "infinity" I could estimate the length easier. If the image was sharp with the lens focused on infinity (say something across the street), all the numbers seemed to be accurate. But then again I haven't measured to be certain.

April 18th, 2004, 09:53 AM	#686
Richard Mellor Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: cambridge ma Posts: 247	Brett -- Thank you for the tip. You are so right; I went back in and fine-tuned the distance to the ground glass, and it got sharper! The best part is that the threaded filter washers can be slowly threaded to achieve what I'm sure is a 1mm adjustment. Once the distance is achieved, tighten it up, and it works perfectly I also did this on the infinity setting. I can't wait to put the anamorphic lens back on this fine tuned aldu35. I also built this with the condenser lens that you knew would work. It has a focal length of 1. The macro that I made before this was 'sub par'. I could not have made this without your optical skill ... the trial and error would have been endless!

April 19th, 2004, 01:12 PM	#687
Justin Burris Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Olympia, WA Posts: 54	I have a few questions: 1. A few times I have heard people say that the grain on the GG becomes pronounced around f4 and above. Is this f4 on the camcorder, or f4 on the SLR lens? 2. What is a "threaded filter washer"? 3. James, do you have a condenser that came in a 55mm filter ring, or did you rig that together somehow? 4. James, in the picture of your rig, the rings that are marked "spacers", are these just filters that you popped the glass out of, or what? 5. I have to imagine that all of you out there who ground your own glass have a bunch of Aluminum Oxide grit left over. Would anyone be willing to sell me what you have left for a percentage of what you paid? It just seems so wasteful to buy a bunch of this stuff, then only use just a little. I'd be happy to take it off your hands. Thanks everybody.

April 19th, 2004, 08:19 PM	#690
James Webb Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 40	Justin- The condensor is a X1 macro 55mm. It seems to work. I still plan to eventually replace it with an actual PCX lens. The other rings I'm referring to as "spacers" are $5 UV filters with the glass removed (I got a couple for free).