yeah...it isn't really acceptable as it is

Yes, but you would think they would have lowered the noise levels in the upgrade similarly - im getting even abit more than what is seen in Phil's images

i have tweaked my short...graded it and changed a shot

Phil,

I like it. The music adds so much drama to the subject. Good work.

Thanks to you, I've just ordered a Brevis, as I find most of my work is done using available light.

I have a short film ready to shot in mid march, but I can't face doing it without the ability to play with DoF to get a more filmic look. I know there are tricks to achieve some DoF with the stock Fujinon lens, but its too limited.

Thanks for the test and footage.

Andrew

yeah it's amazing how music can change what is simply just a few shots knocked off to test the jvc/ brevis combo out.

You will love the Brevis. Definately worth getting either the CF2 or CF3 too as it makes the stuff outside so much nicer. It is pretty easy to change. Takes about five minutes...but be careful as you can let dust in easily! Hopefully Dennis can get it to you in time...I know that the SGPro orders aren't being sent out till the end of March. That's the problem, demand for these has rocketed in the past couple of months making it hard for the guys to meet demand!

it's worth getting rods for the JVC and Brevis. Ones I would recommend are the ENG rods from DVRIG with 10cm extensions (you can specify and length you want from them), which will let you add a mattebox. http://www.dvtec.tv/id32.html

i agree, if you are used to using 2/3rd inch cameras shooting on a 1/3rd chip camera can be really upsetting when you can't get the shallow look.

If you need advice on what lenses to buy let me know!

Phil

Thanks Phil

I'm assuming the CF1 that ships with the brevis is ideal for interior shots?
The majority of my short film is inside.

Andrew

yeah its perfect. its what i used for "homeless portraits"

35mm Lenses?
 

Hi Phil,

What lenses do you have in your kit for the brevis?
Correct me if I am wrong but the 35mm lenses are one that are used for still photographer on SLR Cameras? NO?
Do you have a preferred manufacturer? EG Nikon, Cannon etc?

Simon

These are my two cents:
I choose the M2 over the Brevis-the reason being that while I find them both to be quite sharp, I find that the M2 does a better job on areas that are out of focus- they look smoother and less grainy than with the Brevis. In other words, with the M2, you get less of the ground glass grain. I think the M2 looks cleaner, overall.

Simon!

Were you not paying attention when you assisted me in the shoot in the School last December?!! You were paying too much attention to the XDCAM HD i think!

I shot using the Brevis and you passed me loads of different lenses as I went for different looks. They are all Nikon mounts originally made for 35mm stills camera. Which is what the whole principle behind these adaptors is. Affordable adaptor, affordable glass for affordable cameras! Although we are still talking many thousands to get the best glass, camera adaptor combo. Still cheaper than mini35 and PL mount lenses.

I have 18mm, 20mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 80mm, 135mm, 180mm all as fast as they make 'em!

and 25-80mm, 70-200mm zooms.

The M2 does have a lovely BOKEH. Don't forget the Brevis has swappable diffusers. Check out my website and look at 35mm shorts 2 for a test i did with the Brevis CF2. Jaadgy have you used both then?

Phil

Thanks Phil,

Yeh I remember the number of times handing you the 35mm lenses but I was in XDCAM HD land so my mind was taking up with that. Plus your kit was far from on the small side. Too many toys to take in for a one day shoot. But fun and more than educational.

But as a general rule what price spread would one expect to pay for each of your 35mm lenses? Just a rough figure since I am sure each lens would vary.

standard lenses 50mm and 85mm if you aim for f1.4 you are looking at about £200 each. Fast wider lenses can cost a fair bit. Key is with anything from 35mm to 85mm don't go below f1.8 and for any lens including zooms f2.8 is the slowest you should be looking at. Cheapest lens cost me about £70 most cost me £500 and that was the Zeiss 85mm f1.4...you wouldnt need that just a nice fast second hand Nikon would do.

What might you suggest as an start up kit regarding 35mm lens?

Meaning is there maybe 3 lenses to start with that would give you a resonably broad palette to work with?

There are four lenses I always have on me when shooting with my Brevis or M2.

A Sigma f1.8 20mm
then a Nikon (or in my case Zeiss) 50mm f1.4
85mm f1.4
and a 135mm f2.3/ f2.8 if you can find one. i have a vivitar series 1 which is a very nice piece of glass.

These will cover all your bases and you are unlikely to need any others, especially with the Brevis.

HD100 noise
 

Phil, I have noticed a fair bit of noise coming from my HD100 as well but only in certain conditions. Attached is a pic from a shoot at sunset. This is the worst it has been at 0db. I find that low light + red/orange light is what triggers it. I've been quite satisfied with the imagery otherwise and on most other shoots.

(This shot is with the stock lens)

That is really bad! Totally unacceptable on an HD camera. Has anyone else got examples as bad as this?

Dennis.

What's coming next, - aftermarket low light diffuser kit for the Mini35?

It may have to do with the color profile you use. I think I was using Paolo's TC3, but I'm not sure on any specifics. I know I have since turned down the red gain from where he had it and have not noticed anything quite this bad since. FWIW

Phil, I've been using the M2 since last may, and I've also seen lots of shorts, commercials and Music videos made with it, and as far as image quality, the only adapter I can compare it with is the P+S tecnik adapter.The M2 has a much more desirable Bokeh than the Brevis. I say this even after seeing the wonderful work you've done with the Brevis - but as good as it is, it only confirms to me that the M2 Bokeh is smoother, lovelier, more pleasing.

Ok, you can shoot me if you like, put bare in mind I'm a producer not a camera op or DOP.

Can you define in the picture posted what aspects of it you consider to most highlight 'Totally unacceptable' noise, and how this is going to affect the average viewer?

When answering this - bare in mind that I am looking to shoot a narrative feature film with the P&S Techniks on the HD200/250, renting proper 35mm primes.

Originally were looking at using the HD100, but are now considering the HD200/250 so we can get full 60P in HD for slowmo shots, and a couple of other things.

The film is a thriller, will be lit in a controlled environment but also is likely to have spots of high contrast from light to shadow.

I'm just trying to gauge now whether what you are describing is a genuine massive flaw for the camera for it's intended purposes, or if it's just proving to suffer more noise than expected in certain environments.

Definitely the later - suffers under certain circumstances. Like I said that was the worst I've experienced (and on one of my first shoots too). The best thing you can do is calibrate the camera and test test test. I haven't found any noise unacceptable since then. When using the stock lens especially there are boundaries of acceptable sharpness and color qualities (the subtler of which I'm still figuring out). It can be VERY sharp if your lens is finely tuned.

Here are a few good grabs to help encourage you. It's a great camera and I would guess a killer combo with the Mini35!

(BTW, the "HollandHome" grab does exhibit some CA on the glasses and hair. Shouldn't be a problem if you use something other than the stock lens. The average person doesn't notice anyway.)

Now, are those of you who have the HD250 experiencing the same noise issues? or is this an issue only with the HD200?

Phil,
Your experience and advice is superbly helpful. It seems most of us are using Nikons and I was going to go that route with the Brevis that I plan to order soon, but I realized my old SLR that I have collecting dust has several fast Canon FD primes. Canon optics are known for being quite good, right? Anybody have experience with the Canon lenses.

What I wonder though is why I see a lot of pretty cheap Canon lenses on ebay and such. You can buy fast Canon primes for under 100 bucks. You can even buy a new 50mm/1.4 for like 70 bucks. Is this just way too cheap to be good?

Benjamin

One more thing
 

Phil,
I notice some vignetting in a lot of the shots on your Brevis demo? Was this just with some of the lenses? Am I just making this up. The stuff looks awesome otherwise....and the vignetting adds a nice style, but obviously you wouldn't always want that.

Thanks.

its identical inside so it shouldnt make a difference.

With the vignettes some I added in post, some i did optically by closing down the iris of the 35mm lens which with the Brevis under certain conditions creates a vignette. I also deliberately didn't zoom fully into the gg to enhance that effect. Basically what I am saying is they are deliberate!! I did say that on the page in the shootout but I should put that on the short page too.

Canon lenses are of course superb. Just avoid EOS lenses as they have no manual iris control.

$70 for the lens? buy it! am sure it is fine!

Phil

I see this thread died.
What became of the noise issue?

Is this a setting issue?
Chad's examples really look clean.

Yeah - I hadn't seen Chad's stills. To me those look great. If that's not good enough I don't know what to tell ya.

Why am I buying a RED again?

I think it's partly a settings issue and partly situational. I still get some noise every now and then but it seems to be mainly on darker, predominantly red scenes. It hasn't been enough of an issue for me to want to troubleshoot so maybe I've found the right matrix settings.

I love the camera, but I think I'd still opt for the RED if I could, Joel. ;-)

I shot a dark scene lit with just a red light. It looked awful. It was noisier and looked as if it was out of focus.

I've got a feeling that most video cameras would have choked on that though. In fact, I noticed a scene in "For Your Consideration" that was of a performer on stage and the stage lighting changed to a red light only and that looked like crap too. There's probably some technical reason for that.

Yes - i found any darker scenes - such as night time city scenes are packed full of noise - unusable levels

Have you allready tried it with an M2 and got a foto of the setup and footage. Im consedering getting an m2 and using it with a hvx200 or jvc hd100.

And if you can flip the image in the hd100 (is that also with the hd100?) then it would be great setup to use handheld for a videoclip.

Djee, no flip in the HD100. You can physically flip the viewfinder by loosening a few screws though. I just got my Brevis tonight and am still testing it out. Looks pretty good so far. :-) I have to figure out the limitations yet though. A few wrong moves and you can see a lot of grain/vignetting with certain lenses.

Hmm I don't know if the rental company would like it if I would physically change the camera.

Chad

Keep us informed about results with the brevis and HD100

Thanks


Andrew

Will do, Drew. As of this moment though I can say that it seems that the HD100 lens/macro or combo with the achromat may be to blame partially for the vignettes. I tried my 135mm/Brevis on my FX1 and it wasn't nearly as bad. Dennis has mentioned a new Achro coming soon so that my fix it. Also he's working on an imager that will be better with vignettes on long lenses. Still too early to tell for me. I have a lot of testing to do.

hi
very great pictures ! is that from a HD200 ?
i don't see any noise at all ! what settings did you used to achieve this ?

i don't really understand why does dark areas produce noise... why don't the camera take it as is that's all ? :D

That was from an HD100 with the PT3 settings using Standard gamma. I don't know why the noise is there sometimes. But I do know that if you expose well (above 50IRE) that you will get cleaner images. But sometimes it has to be dark and I guess that's when you roll the dice. ;-)

This is great info to hear about. So was there a total tally number of F stops of light lost with the adapter and such?

Thanks Chad for the updates!

Tony B.

Roy,
I've rated my HD100 + Brevis + 2.8 lens at 125 ASA.

I include the prime lens in there because I almost always leave it at 2.8 so it's more or less a fixed setting and I adjust the stock lens iris.

I've read that the JVC alone is about 320ASA which would make the adapter + lens a stop and a half slower.

One interesting note is that I have never gained any real amount of light by opening the prime lens up to even a 1.2. In my experience it's the same whether you're at a 1.4 or 2.8 with the Brevis. Curious I know, but I wonder what others have experienced with this or other adapters.

that's odd Chad. I definately find a difference with that wide range of stops. Also with the cf3 anything over f1.8 and i get that static grain.