35 mm adapters
 

What differences are there in functionality between using Nikon and Canon lenses? I gather that the aperture information can be seen in the viewfinder when using Canon lenses. I presume that exposure is still set manually?

I am not sure about the difference between the 2 lenses,
I have only used Nikon's. But I don't know if the correct aperture info would appear in the viewfinder since there is no communication with the camera and the lens on the Adapter
and yes the exposure is controlled on the lens manually...
But actually I use a Letus that replaces the lens completely on the H1...
I am not sure about an adapter that goes on top of the stock lens - it's probably different

I don't understand how John uses a letus without a lens between the Letus and the camera. I think he probably uses a relay lense that does not zoom or have other significant adjustments. He still would have to have a lens that focus on the ground glass screen. If not, I have missed something somewhere. The whole point of the 35mm adapters is to throw an image on a ground glass with the characteritics of the 35 mm film camera shot, and for the video camera to record it through its chip.

The rest of us who have fixed lens cameras, actually zoom close up using the existing lens. If our cameras can not focus on the ground glass, we have to use an achromat, to give closer focusing capability. I have an FX1 that requires that.

Because I have a fixed lens, I can adjust the aperture of the video lens to lessen or increase the exposure, use the neutral density filters. I try to shoot every thing at 1/60 and use the cameras aperature and neutrals to control light. As far as the 35mm lens aperature is concerned, the real purpose of the use of that lense is to get a shallow depth of field. So, you want it in the F 1.4 to F 2.8, or you start getting depth of field back...

The quality of lenses will vary from lens producer to lens producer. I use Pentax because that is what I have, I think I get a decent image on my homemade unit. Nikons are suggested because there are a lot of them out there. Same with Canons. I've seen great shots from both using the 35 mm adapter.

The XL series has removable lenses as you know. Qu designed an adapter that fits directly on to the XL without the stock lens. It contains the ground glass, relay lens and image flip functions all in one unit. There is no addional focusing because the relay lens is made to focus the GG to the CCD.

We've gone off topic but what is the image quality like when using the 35mm Letus adapter?

andrew,
the quality is very good
see Quyen's site is www.adapterplace.com/
and has picts of the Letus XL

I much prefer shooting with this adapter to the Stock lens, esp because it allows me to run & gun (ie it is not so huge & it has a Flip function built in)
though an A1 + adapter would also be managable
there is some light loss and maybe res loss (the latter I never notice)
Though very compressed, I have some footage on my site under "reel"

John Benton
http://www.thereelshit.com

My bad. Thought I was in 35mm adapter forum, rather than XL H1 forum...

the best adapter I have found for the H1
is the Letus because of the relay lens/flip
smaller managable form factor for run & gun.
Though everyone has their own pref

Rez loss and light loss is inevitable with these adapters. Personally I'm amazed that John has had such good results with his Letus. The one I had was plagued with grain, vignetting, light loss, chroma aberration and distortion problems, and if you look around this board there are a lot of people who share this sentiment.