JVC GY HD100 - Depth of Field
 

Hey guys, I was wondering about the experience youve had controlling the JVC'S DoF. I'm buying one in a couple of weeks to shoot a narrative and need a shallow DoF. Is it easy to get a good, shallow DoF with the stock Fujinon? Being DV, I know its no walk in the park, but how does it compare with other HDV cameras? What can I do to get the best, shallow DoF?

Thanks.

The depth of field is virtually the same as all the other 1/3" CCD HDV cameras. Unless you're going to spend the money to use something like the "Mini-35" or the Redrock Micro M2, your best bet is to shoot at the longest focal length you can and keep your iris as close to completely open as possible. The downside with the stock lens is that this recipe also tends to increase the appearance of chromatic aberration (the 13x lens will do much better in the CA dept. albeit at a hefty price.)

Kenn is right.

Unfortunately, you need the distance from your talent for the shallow DOF.
This makes it tough for indoor shots. Also the chemistry of wide shallow DOF shots are not possible with these 1/3" cameras unless you're using a 35mm adapter.

You have to be careful of CA using the wide aperture and tele end of the lens.
Usually, you can fiddle with both of these and minimize it. Of course it depends what you're shooting. High contrast edges drive the CA.

One other problem is being at the tele end of the lens, small camera movements make it tough to get scrolling movement without exaggerating
camera shake.

Having said that, it is possible to get some shallow DOF footage.

What they said. It is possible to get some very nice DoF and Rack Focus effects. There are a few examples floating around the boards, usually referring to rack focus.

Another trick you can play around with, if your shot supports it, is to fiddle with the Macro focus ring. I've heard that you can get some interesting results with that, although I haven't tried it out myself.

Using the macro ring will probably throw your other focus calculations way out of whack, but it might work. Or then again, it might not.

The macro ring does help. I was shooting shots of people eating in a dinner the other day and I got some great shallow DOF shots and then I realized that I had left the Marco ring turned from when I was doing some close up shots the last time I used the camera. You will need to play with it, but it help some with the DOF.

Dan Weber

Hmm..
I have not tried that.
Has anyone else tried this?
It seems to good to be true.

Of course using the macro means that back focus will not work.

We have verified that you can do a really useable rack focus using the maro ring.

I have done it with success, along with the in-camera ND filters to force the iris to be as open as possible.

Luis

I use it often. The macro ring can be your best friend.

Thanks alot.

Do you think the Mini 35 is worth the money?

Greg,

I have not used it, as of now, maybe by the end of the month. But based on footage I have seen, along with good cinematic techniques, it will enhance your final work so much that if you have the money to own/rent it, IMHO is worth it. See http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=67270 for footage and information on this topic. Very immpresive.

Luis

I think only if you're using primes. The stock lens or 13x lens using macro ring technique can give outstanding results as well.

I'd personally look at Red Rock's Micro35 before springing for P+S mini35. I'm not sure if there's a difference in quality, but you can't beat the difference in price.

One major difference between the Mini35 and the Red Rock M2 is that the M2 requires the original lens be mounted, whereas the Mini35 mounts directly to the camera body.

I guess it kinda depends on what type of lenses you're planning on using. The HD100 + stock lens + M2 + Cine lens could get mighty long, mighty fast. But like Stephan said, you can't beat the price.

That's pretty lame, I didn't know that... Especially going through a zoom lens, that's an awful lot of glass between the outside world and the CCD.

Yeah, but you've got to remember the Mini35 has a bunch of extra glass inside that does the image reorientation. That degrades quality and loses light too.

I'd like to see a good side by side. The only one I know of was on the set of 24 where they preferred the M2 with an HD-100.

Yeah, I'll second that. Playing with the macro ring is really fun. You really have to set up the shot, but definitely cool.

Not nearly as much "extra" glass as a fully functional zoom lens which can contain dozens of elements. The Mini35 just has to project the image from the ground glass onto the camera's chips, it's not even as much glass as a prime, it doesn't even have to rack focus.

But I believe the Mini35 does lose more light than the M2 and I've not seen anything showing the picture quality is better. I think that probably is due to the image flip prisms as opposed to the relay lens.

It sure seems it would be optimal to have a quality relay lens built specifically for for the M2. Or advice on how to build your own from some expert out there.

As an early adopter of the Mini35 and working pretty closely with the people on the technical end, I wanted to correct this statement. You absolutely don't need primes to get a great image with the Mini35. We built our setup around a set of the best and fastest Nikon AIS glass and the images were every bit as good as the footage shot with Zeiss Super Speeds and Cookes that we used. The only difference was in breathing (no real problem) and the lack of gearing for follow-focus that is inherent in a cine prime.

P&S provides different mounts for the Mini35 because you can, in fact, use it with cine's or any 35mm glass of good quality.

Also, while I've encouraged people on getting the most (or least in this case) dof from the Fuji and Canon zooms, they can't do anything like what a Mini35 or Redrock adaptor will deliver for cinematic work.

The bottom line is, if you want to work with focal lengths and exposure that make sense and get truly shallow dof an adaptor is the only thing that will get you there because it's the only way to get true 35mm dof and fov with 1/3" chips.

Again, theat's not to say you can't blur out the background a bit or even a good bit at the longer end of the tele with a good deal of separation and a wide open iris, but can you also get a very compressed image in most situations and you can only work with tight CUs.

Working with 35mm dof you can get any degree of blur and do it with 50mm or 35mm lens the way you would choose to from a film making standpoint.

One other thing about the gearing on Nikons versus cine primes, the new Redrock follow-focus solves that problem with a set of adjustable gearing rings for your non-cine primes that should pretty much eliminate the last real difference between them as far as indie film making goes.

I was so impressed with the whole Redrock concept that I'm just ordering a whole setup today.

Good point. Plus, when you put the camera in motion there's a big difference in the feel of moving a 35mm lens around vs. a zoomed in Fujinon. Moving a wider FOV with shallow DOF feels very cinematic.

What Nikon lenses did you guys test?

Absolutely Joel. We built a set of primes that would pretty much emulate what you would use in a cine set (and what we would rent for a big shoot). That is 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 105mm, 135mm.

You can get by either cine or Nikon with a 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and move your camera around, but the larger set works great. I don't have all the f/stops in my head, but the 35, 50, 85mm are 1.2 - 1.4 ...very fast and solid and smooth gearing.
You want AIS fully manual to get both the build and smooth focus. The Nikon 85mm 1.4 AIS is one of the nicest lenses they've ever made and gives a gorgeous image and dof. It's almost the build and size of a cine prime, similar is the 135mm
( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search)
All of this glass can be found on ebay or Adorama used etc, but for the money it's worth buying a core set new and adding as you need to IMO.
The 35mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.2 are great too and they're also small and short and won't add much to the front of the M2 (62mm and 53mm diameters versus the 72mm 85 and 135)

Thanks for the tips. I have several lenses but like my Nikkor 85mm 1.8AF best despite being AF. I know the 85mm 1.4 is a favorite, but the 1.8 is really nice too for less money.

I'd like to test the Tamron 28-75AF 2.8. I've heard it's small, light and sharp. Certainly would be convenient for reframing quickly.

It's not as fast but if you want to check out a small full manual metal Nikon with a two touch design and smooth focus look at the 35-70mm AIS. You can get a new Imported one for around $250