Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Any experience of using DOF adaptors?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Oxford, UK
    Posts
    1

    Default Any experience of using DOF adaptors?

    Hi

    Does anyone use a 35 mm DOF adaptor - Letus, Redrock, etc? Anything to report? I'm interested in getting one and found a few cheaper options in the US.

    I'm guessing that you simply achieve the shallow DOF look without any real increase in overall 'image quality', since the lens of the camera itself would act as a weaker link?

    Despite the 'wow - watch me endlessly focussing on a leaf!' effect these things seem to have on camera owners showing their stuff online, it's hard not to be impressed with how cheaply you can achieve this aesthetic now.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    972

    Default

    I did a search on "35mm DOF Adaptors" and found an incomprehansible mass of "How-to" Guides . . . .
    In simple (for me) Terms can you explain "what" these adaptors are and "why" you are doing it?
    What's this vibrating motor for? The circuit proposed looks highly original (ie it will not work ).....ooer

    Another suggested melting wax and putting it between glass slides - doesn't this destroy the optic quality you paid $$$'s for? -or- is there a tiny bug between the glass and (he) is trying to - - -?

    - - - no, I really don#'t get it, - please explain...

  3. #3

    Default

    vidmanners. If someone wants to have a sort of film like shallow depth of field look to there video, one of the ways they can do this is with an adapter. It's just an aesthetic choice. The basics of how it works is that through an additional lens, an image is projected onto a translucent screen. To stop a graining of the image from this screen, they can be made to vibrate or rotate depending on the make and model of the adaptor. The video camera lens focuses on this image. Due to the mechanics of lens and sensors and laws of light etc. which I can't explain, you can achieve a narrow depth of field.

    Hope that helps.

  4. #4

    Default

    drissa, your taking a chance mentioning the D word round here ..... i can here the Digital Director DOF police sirens on their way

  5. #5

    Default

    drissa, I haven't ever used one but spent a lot of time looking into them, I was waiting for the new Redrock M3 to come out which seemed to take an age and then I lost interest in them. AT that time I had come to the conclusion that it was the best value for money as the Letus seemed over expensive for what it was.

    Then Panasonic and Sony started to bring out interchangeable lens cameras with big sensors at a good price like the AF100, Now they are not really needed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    10,844
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by enc View Post
    drissa, your taking a chance mentioning the D word round here ..... i can here the Digital Director DOF police sirens on their way
    That would be me then.

    'Ello, 'ello, 'ello. What all this out of focus stuff in the background then? Oh, you won't get away with shifting it to the foreground, Sonny Jim. I saw it, fuzzy as anything with my own eyes"

    As I'm sure you're aware enc, I have nothing against shallow DoF or focus pulling. My previous rants have al been about the overuse of such techniques and in particular the fact that some people see it as some sort of Holy Grail in their quest to get that "film look". To me, it seemed to be the intermediate videographers' equivalent of the noob's variety box of transitions.

    I'm rather delighted that this fad seems to have passed - or is in decline at least. I've certainly not seen so many examples of it. Somehow I don't think my one-man campaign is exclusively responsible, but I'm relieved it's happening.
    Tim

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    972

    Default

    Midnight blue, thanks for the reply,
    - but it's a tad difficult to follow (for me, not having seen as such in the flesh, as it were).
    Are you suggesting these adaptors allow a secondary image to be added (eg from a projector did I read?) and this image can be softened by the vibrations of the (presumably semi-transparent miror)...in stage-speak this is called Banquo's Ghost - but here I could be drifting way-off!
    It sounds like a lot of work, but maybe easier than back-projecting. I presume the foreground needs to be quite bright to cut through the secondary image. . . . IF folk buy this equipment . . . . it must be a tiny market.
    ....I think I'll go for a lie-down....

    I thought foolishly this might be a sharp-centre filter, so anything off-axis would be OOF, - but that's also called spot-filter and is quite cheap (or you can make your own e.g. with vaseline and thin glass, etc.)
    All of this is commonplace in Stills Photography; although Movies = a whole NEW can of worms.
    Thanks.

  8. #8

    Default

    This video has and explanation of what I was trying to say about DOF adapters.

Similar Threads

  1. experience with wedding fairs
    By CharlieEdwards in forum Wedding and Event Videography
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-23-2009, 02:26 AM
  2. First experience...
    By 2dart in forum Wedding and Event Videography
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 08-27-2007, 02:14 PM
  3. 35mm adaptors - info.
    By Mark W in forum Technology advice and tips
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-15-2007, 10:39 PM
  4. A truly amazing experience . . .
    By ChrisG in forum Forum Announcements and News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-09-2006, 07:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •