Has anyone tested a SD lens on the HPX500? at DVinfo.net

Kit Hannah · January 6th, 2008, 01:03 PM

Just wondering if anyone has tested a SD lens on the HPX500 and what they found the results to be. Would be interesting to see a comaprison, or just some standard frame grabs from that of a SD lens. I have seen numerous posts saying that SD lenses can produce very acceptable results, even on HD cameras.

ALso, with the HPX500 CAC, would this help when using a SD lens?

Thanks
Kit

Kaku Ito · January 6th, 2008, 07:13 PM

Kit,

There's a thread that I posted before that talks about older canon broadcast SD lens. I still have the lens so I can try shoot something if you have anything that you wanna see in particular.

Basically, SD lens look fine with close-ups but you would notice the sharpness problem on the wide angle shots.

I will look for the clips that I shot before and post it on my blog.

By the way, CAC only works when the appropriate lens (CAC compatible) is attached.

Kit Hannah · January 7th, 2008, 01:15 AM

Thanks Kaku.
At this point, i am just looking to get into some cameras, preferrably the HPX500's or 555's, but I would like to slowly get into them. If I could start with some SD lenses and work my way up, that would be awesome. This way, I can obtain everything I need much faster and easier.

If you have some time, I would appreciate ANY footage you can put together very quickly. Just a couple random shots with the 500/555 & sd lens - outdoors in your back yard or from a balcony or anything. Don't worry about composition or framing, just a couple quick zooms and pans at: #1 1080 30p, #2 1080 24p, and#3 regular SD. Trees, buildings, people, whatever. I just need to see if I will be able to produce acceptable quality video with a SD lens for the time being.

Ideally, my goal would be to produce something in 1080p, but if that is not possible but SD is, the I'll accept that route.

Thanks again Kaku. And if anyone else has the capability of doing this, that would be great too.

Bob Woodhead · January 7th, 2008, 06:50 AM

I tried a friend's SD wide angle 2/3" Canon (good quality) & found it to be softer than the Fuji CAC. Sorry, deleted the shots long ago.

Kit Hannah · January 7th, 2008, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Woodhead

I tried a friend's SD wide angle 2/3" Canon (good quality) & found it to be softer than the Fuji CAC. Sorry, deleted the shots long ago.

Thanks, Bob.

But when you say "softer", do you mean that it looked blurry or was it just not quite as crisp? Did it yield acceptable results if you were not directly comparing the 2? Did you get a lot of fringing and CA?

Thanks
Kit

Bob Woodhead · January 7th, 2008, 02:15 PM

Just not as crisp as the Fuji CAC. Acceptable.... hmmm... probably, for the non-purist-hyper-critical person. Saw no fringing or CA, but the scene I used it on didn't have much contrast (where I believe it's easiest to spot). FWIW, remember it was a wide lens. Really just threw it on to see what'd happen... noticed it wasn't as crisp, but decided it'd work if necessary. (Better a bit softer than no shot at all, right?)

Kit Hannah · January 7th, 2008, 03:17 PM

It is better a bit softer than no image.

I'm not looking for something super critical here. I just want something that people are going to go "WOW", especially compared to what you see on TV. Bob, would you say that the image with an SD lens natively looked comparable to a compressed TV image you would see on an HD channel? I'm just looking for "acceptable" right now so I can get into some nice cameras here. The lens upgrades can come later. But I know that if we go that route, we can't just get into something if the image is just going to look blurry to the average person.

So, in your opinion, do you think that the image would look good to the average person watching it on a regular television or on a low end projector? I'm stepping up from JVC HD-110's here. It's going to all be compressed to DVD for the time being anyways.

Thanks
Kit

Bob Woodhead · January 7th, 2008, 05:01 PM

Oh yeah, it wasn't "bad" in any way (keep in mind that CA wasn't an issue doe to location). I also didn't play with the zoom range much... we had a wide angle along on a certain shoot because we thought we might need it, we did, so took a moment to grab some A/B footage of the scene. Not a good evaluation in any way, just a quick off-the-cuff deal.
If you already have good SD glass, why not run with that & buy an "upscale" CAC lens later? We've had some superb posts about how CAC really does work. So that combined with a non-breathing zoom would be something special.

Kit Hannah · January 7th, 2008, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Woodhead

Oh yeah, it wasn't "bad" in any way (keep in mind that CA wasn't an issue doe to location). I also didn't play with the zoom range much... we had a wide angle along on a certain shoot because we thought we might need it, we did, so took a moment to grab some A/B footage of the scene. Not a good evaluation in any way, just a quick off-the-cuff deal.
If you already have good SD glass, why not run with that & buy an "upscale" CAC lens later? We've had some superb posts about how CAC really does work. So that combined with a non-breathing zoom would be something special.

That seems to be the general consensus. Theoretically, people have been saying without a CAC lens or HD on this will be disasterous, but from all the people that have actually tried this method, they're saying that a SD lens produces acceptable resulte. While not "ideal", as long as they are acceptable, that's good enough for me. In an ideal world, we wouldn't even be having this conversation and I would be out shooting on my HPX3000's...Maybe some day...

Bob Woodhead · January 7th, 2008, 07:04 PM

ohhh.... you want a 3000? I'll loan one of 6 I have, free, for 3 years, if you *really* want a 3000..... ;))

Kit Hannah · January 7th, 2008, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Woodhead

ohhh.... you want a 3000? I'll loan one of 6 I have, free, for 3 years, if you *really* want a 3000..... ;))

LOL, HPX3000......? If so I am good for it..... LOL

Kaku Ito · January 10th, 2008, 10:54 PM

Kit,

I will do the quick test on Saturday for you. Hang on.

Kit Hannah · January 10th, 2008, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaku Ito

Kit,

I will do the quick test on Saturday for you. Hang on.

You are awesome, Kaku. Thanks buddy, I look forward to it. Planning to get my first 500 hopefully in the next week.... Possibly even ordering it tomorrow. I don't know that I will be purchasing the lens at the same time or from the same company, looking for a good used solution and awaiting feedback from my friends on the forums such as yourself. I really appreciate it!
Kit

Kaku Ito · January 11th, 2008, 03:00 AM

I briefly tested in front of my office, but very old broadcast Canon lens performs really well. It's so old so the focus would affect the zoom (how you call it?) but if you get relatively new broadcast SD lens, it would be mostly fine. I will post some results later.

Kaku Ito · January 11th, 2008, 10:02 AM

Kit,

What computer platform do you use? What video format (interlace or progressive) and what type of compressed format do you want (H.264?)?

January 7th, 2008, 03:17 PM	#7
Kit Hannah Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Fresno, California Posts: 528	It is better a bit softer than no image. I'm not looking for something super critical here. I just want something that people are going to go "WOW", especially compared to what you see on TV. Bob, would you say that the image with an SD lens natively looked comparable to a compressed TV image you would see on an HD channel? I'm just looking for "acceptable" right now so I can get into some nice cameras here. The lens upgrades can come later. But I know that if we go that route, we can't just get into something if the image is just going to look blurry to the average person. So, in your opinion, do you think that the image would look good to the average person watching it on a regular television or on a low end projector? I'm stepping up from JVC HD-110's here. It's going to all be compressed to DVD for the time being anyways. Thanks Kit Last edited by Kit Hannah; January 7th, 2008 at 04:35 PM.

January 6th, 2008, 01:03 PM	#1
Kit Hannah Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Fresno, California Posts: 528	Has anyone tested a SD lens on the HPX500? Just wondering if anyone has tested a SD lens on the HPX500 and what they found the results to be. Would be interesting to see a comaprison, or just some standard frame grabs from that of a SD lens. I have seen numerous posts saying that SD lenses can produce very acceptable results, even on HD cameras. ALso, with the HPX500 CAC, would this help when using a SD lens? Thanks Kit

January 6th, 2008, 07:13 PM	#2
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Kit, There's a thread that I posted before that talks about older canon broadcast SD lens. I still have the lens so I can try shoot something if you have anything that you wanna see in particular. Basically, SD lens look fine with close-ups but you would notice the sharpness problem on the wide angle shots. I will look for the clips that I shot before and post it on my blog. By the way, CAC only works when the appropriate lens (CAC compatible) is attached.

January 7th, 2008, 01:15 AM	#3
Kit Hannah Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Fresno, California Posts: 528	Thanks Kaku. At this point, i am just looking to get into some cameras, preferrably the HPX500's or 555's, but I would like to slowly get into them. If I could start with some SD lenses and work my way up, that would be awesome. This way, I can obtain everything I need much faster and easier. If you have some time, I would appreciate ANY footage you can put together very quickly. Just a couple random shots with the 500/555 & sd lens - outdoors in your back yard or from a balcony or anything. Don't worry about composition or framing, just a couple quick zooms and pans at: #1 1080 30p, #2 1080 24p, and#3 regular SD. Trees, buildings, people, whatever. I just need to see if I will be able to produce acceptable quality video with a SD lens for the time being. Ideally, my goal would be to produce something in 1080p, but if that is not possible but SD is, the I'll accept that route. Thanks again Kaku. And if anyone else has the capability of doing this, that would be great too.

January 7th, 2008, 06:50 AM	#4
Bob Woodhead Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 59	I tried a friend's SD wide angle 2/3" Canon (good quality) & found it to be softer than the Fuji CAC. Sorry, deleted the shots long ago.

January 7th, 2008, 02:15 PM	#6
Bob Woodhead Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 59	Just not as crisp as the Fuji CAC. Acceptable.... hmmm... probably, for the non-purist-hyper-critical person. Saw no fringing or CA, but the scene I used it on didn't have much contrast (where I believe it's easiest to spot). FWIW, remember it was a wide lens. Really just threw it on to see what'd happen... noticed it wasn't as crisp, but decided it'd work if necessary. (Better a bit softer than no shot at all, right?)

January 7th, 2008, 05:01 PM	#8
Bob Woodhead Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 59	Oh yeah, it wasn't "bad" in any way (keep in mind that CA wasn't an issue doe to location). I also didn't play with the zoom range much... we had a wide angle along on a certain shoot because we thought we might need it, we did, so took a moment to grab some A/B footage of the scene. Not a good evaluation in any way, just a quick off-the-cuff deal. If you already have good SD glass, why not run with that & buy an "upscale" CAC lens later? We've had some superb posts about how CAC really does work. So that combined with a non-breathing zoom would be something special.

January 7th, 2008, 07:04 PM	#10
Bob Woodhead Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 59	ohhh.... you want a 3000? I'll loan one of 6 I have, free, for 3 years, if you really want a 3000..... ;))

January 10th, 2008, 10:54 PM	#12
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Kit, I will do the quick test on Saturday for you. Hang on.

January 11th, 2008, 03:00 AM	#14
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	I briefly tested in front of my office, but very old broadcast Canon lens performs really well. It's so old so the focus would affect the zoom (how you call it?) but if you get relatively new broadcast SD lens, it would be mostly fine. I will post some results later.

January 11th, 2008, 10:02 AM	#15
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Kit, What computer platform do you use? What video format (interlace or progressive) and what type of compressed format do you want (H.264?)?