You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

35mm Lens adaptor for Gl2

Posted: Tue, 24th Jul 2007, 1:28am

Post 1 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Does anyone know where I can get some plans to build a 35mm lens adaptor for a canon gl2. Also if anyone knows of any good adaptors to buy that would be great too. Ive been searching the internet for a couple hours now without any good results.
Posted: Tue, 24th Jul 2007, 2:13am

Post 2 of 42

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

From hatsoff2halford here
Posted: Tue, 24th Jul 2007, 2:28am

Post 3 of 42

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Glad you're taking my advice, Dan. Hope it works out for you.
Posted: Tue, 24th Jul 2007, 4:50am

Post 4 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

RebornProductions wrote:

From hatsoff2halford here
Yes I searched the forums and found this thread already. I messaged hatsoff2halford about his 35mm lense adapter so I hope he responds. Thanks for spending the time to help me though.
Posted: Tue, 24th Jul 2007, 7:43am

Post 5 of 42

hatsoff2halford

Force: 1360 | Joined: 6th Feb 2005 | Posts: 360

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I sent you a PM back, Dancamfx.
Posted: Tue, 24th Jul 2007, 10:04am

Post 6 of 42

dungmeister

Force: 0 | Joined: 13th May 2007 | Posts: 13

Member

Dancamfx it seems as though you have been doing what I have been doing! searching the web for hours at end looking for plans. Well the website and plans I'm gonna use are from:


http://www.jetsetmodels.info/

I think the sites real good cause it has a step by step guide to building a vibrating adapter (to remove the grain) and has the links to where you can buy the stuff for around $150 US.

Hope this helps

jojodungy
Posted: Thu, 26th Jul 2007, 5:31am

Post 7 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

FXhomer58679 wrote:

Dancamfx it seems as though you have been doing what I have been doing! searching the web for hours at end looking for plans. Well the website and plans I'm gonna use are from:


http://www.jetsetmodels.info/

I think the sites real good cause it has a step by step guide to building a vibrating adapter (to remove the grain) and has the links to where you can buy the stuff for around $150 US.

Hope this helps

jojodungy
I'd like to second that. The thing about that adapter is that you really can buy all the parts in one session online and when you get it you just assemble it (well, if you are doing vibrating gg you have do a little but of drilling and extremely basic wiring, but I'm building a static.) IMO this is the easiest to build and most straightforward guide with video instructions for assembly.
Posted: Thu, 26th Jul 2007, 6:48pm

Post 8 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Serpent,

Is it possible to use those plans without the vibrating gg or is it necessary?
Posted: Thu, 26th Jul 2007, 7:39pm

Post 9 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Dancamfx wrote:

Serpent,

Is it possible to use those plans without the vibrating gg or is it necessary?
I am usuing those plans to make a static (in other words, standing still) gg. So yes. All you do is skip the steps where he drills the whole and does the wiring and instead of buying the vibrating holder, buy a static holder. If you look in hatsoff2harold's thread, he said the Canon Ee-A is available on a more reliable site than eBay: B and H Photo. It's also a brighter screen. So if you purchase the static Ee-A holder and the Canon Ee-A ground glass, you should be well off.

This is the tutorial I'm following and I'm assuming you are looking at the same one:
http://www.jetsetmodels.info/pics/diy_35dof_video.mov
Posted: Fri, 27th Jul 2007, 7:53am

Post 10 of 42

dungmeister

Force: 0 | Joined: 13th May 2007 | Posts: 13

Member

Serpent, You must be careful using a static gg as there is a large chance that the image will be grainy due to small dust on the gg. With the vibrating one it shakes so that the grains are blurred out (not really blurred) so that you cant see them.

Static also increases vigenetting (i think, not really sure what it is but sounds bad).

I would reccommend using the vibrating or even if you want a rotating gg (in which case the gg (usually a clear cd) is spun around. It's similar to vibrating but takes up more room.

The price of making one is relatively low aswell (for vibrating) but it all depends on how much work you want to put into building it.

jojodungy
Posted: Fri, 27th Jul 2007, 4:57pm

Post 11 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

If your ground glass is extremely fine, grain is hardly visible. I'd rather save the money as I don't have much right now. In fact, I'm literally earning just enough for single parts of this thing, ordering them, and then saving up for the next. I am thinking about upgrading to vibrating in the future. But user Edweirdo from DVXUser.com used a Nikon D focusing screen in his original 35mm adapter, which is the screen I am using, and there was no grain to be found. The grain is usually not due to dust, but the ground glass being static and less fine. Dust does show up sometimes and it is "more invisible" with a vibrating holder, but I'm going to build mine dust proof. Easier said than done, but I'm going to assemble it as many times as it takes for the dust to stay out. The vibrating price knocks my price up quite a bit. I wouldn't say it's much harder to build though.

Rotating ground glass is possibly the worst option. Higher shutter speeds pick up the movement much easier than vibrating. Not to mention if the glass isn't really perfect, you will notice swirling in your image. Most people go static or vibrating.

FYI: Vignetting is the effect of darker edges and corners due to a flaw in the way light enters the lens. Usually you want an evenly exposed image, but often in lower quality lenses vignetting occurs.

Sometimes it can be used stylistically but is achieved in post. Most of the time people strive for an even shot as opposed to the darker edges. I honestly don't see how vibration would reduce this, but if I have to I'll correct it in post because I can't afford vibrating GG.
Posted: Fri, 27th Jul 2007, 8:42pm

Post 12 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Serpent, It looks like you and I are doing the same thing by saving up for each part at a time. I looked at alot of instructions for an adapter but I can never get a good list of parts needed for the static adapter. You seem to be ahead of me in the project so could you write me up a list of parts you're gonna buy. Im making a static adapter like you are and I already have a couple 35mm lenses. Also, is it possible to convert a Static adapter to a vibrating one later on? Thanks
Posted: Fri, 27th Jul 2007, 8:55pm

Post 13 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

If you look at the video tutorial I posted, he really gives you a parts list. But I'll post a list anyways.

-2 Cheap Canon EOS Macro Extension Tubes (eBay) Total $32 for 2 including shipping.
http://www.biggerbids.com/members/images/4813/public/160430_Macro-tube-Nikon.jpg
That picture is a Nikon mount one, but that's basically what it looks like. All the cheap EOS ones are manufactured in Asia and they're really all the same if you find it on ebay. Find the cheapest but most reliable seller.

-GG Holder from: http://www.jetsetmodels.info/static.htm This fits in the Macro extension tube and he has instructions on how to position it on his site. You can always upgrade to vibrating later if you aren't happy. Go fo the Canon holder as I said earlier.

-Canon Ee-A screen. That is your GG, what your image will be on. You can get these at a reliable dealer like http://bhphotovideo.com

-2 55mm Coated UV filters. These vary in quality. I believe you could also go ahead and just get a clear "filter," but the UV filters might reduce internal glare, so I'd go for that. You could probably get these pretty cheap.

-If you have Canon EOS lenses, they fit on the end of the macro tube. If not, you'll have to buy an EOS > _____ converter. This will turn the EOS mount at the end of the adapter into a mount for a different kind of lens.

-You might have to buy an achromat. I haven't gotten this far as I'm going to build the adapter first. Ask Daniel personally about this. The achromat he sells will NOT fit on your GL2, it's too small. I might be able to help you out when I get here. An achromat basically reduces and chromatic abberation, but most importantly it allows your camera to manually focus close enough so it can focus on the screen.

If you buy Daniel's GG holder, he tells you how to put the screen inside the holder, which is incredibly simple.

NOTE: On the video tutorial it says to glue your screen into the GG holder. I'm pretty sure his GG holders make that unnecessary. In other words, you can just put a tiny screw in the GG holder and the edge of the screw overlaps the glass and holds it in place.
Posted: Sat, 28th Jul 2007, 12:07am

Post 14 of 42

dungmeister

Force: 0 | Joined: 13th May 2007 | Posts: 13

Member

Ah so thats what vignetting is! thanks. I was wondering, how much has the whole device cost you so far? See I was gonna go for the vibrating but since you have explained about the static I've changed my opinion. Oh by the way do any of you have any experience or know about the Canon HV20? is it a good camera. I'm going to put the adapter onto this (and yes I have seen the plans on Dan's website biggrin ).
thanks

Oh and by the way what type/how much was your 35mm lens?
Posted: Sat, 28th Jul 2007, 1:41am

Post 15 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Serpent,

Thanks for the list. I watched that video again and noticed that at the end he uses a 55mm polarizing filter to connect and align the def adapter horizontally. It wasnt on the parts list so is it nessesary?
Posted: Sat, 28th Jul 2007, 5:10am

Post 16 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

FXhomer58679 wrote:

Ah so thats what vignetting is! thanks. I was wondering, how much has the whole device cost you so far? See I was gonna go for the vibrating but since you have explained about the static I've changed my opinion. Oh by the way do any of you have any experience or know about the Canon HV20? is it a good camera. I'm going to put the adapter onto this (and yes I have seen the plans on Dan's website biggrin ).
thanks

Oh and by the way what type/how much was your 35mm lens?
DVXUser.com has a whole Canon section about the HV20. It's really supposed to be the best camera in that price range right now. Fantastic camera. I'm using an inferior GL1 (I like the body design better, and the lens, but it's an older camera). The lenses I have are as follows:

Canon 17-40 f/4L $680
Canon 70-200 f/4L $600
Canon 50mm Compact Macro Prime $230
1980's Canon Kit Lens (Crap...)

The first two are proffesional quality EOS lenses, the 3rd is a very nice prime macro lens. The fourth is an old lens my dad has that I wouldn't put in front of my camera. I am very into photography so I have access to these. I would go for some brighter (lower f/#, like 1.6 etc.) lower priced Canon primes. They are usually around $100 and very sharp and good for low light and shallow DOF. Most of the cheap lenses still have high ratings at FredMiranda because of their value, so check out the review pages under "Canon Prime." Note: these lenses do not zoom in. You'll have to get zoom lenses for that function. You could always buy older lenses used so you can get more for the buck, but Canon EOS mount lenses are the best. Sigma also makes EOS mount lenses. They are basically a 3rd party that makes cheaper lenses for Canon cameras but their quality is fantastic. Just find decent lenses. The higher end lenses like the L series aren't going to make much of a difference with the 35mm adapter. I just happen to have some already.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 would be a good bet. It's bright for low light and you can get a great shallow DOF with some high quality blurred portions of the image.

Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 is fairly bright and it is reccomended by FredMiranda users. It's also a cheap lens and will cover your wider angles.

For a longer lens for that long shot (which makes your DOF more shallow in certain situations) I really don't know what to tell you to get. I bet a used lens and an EOS converter would be a better value because if you aren't into photography, $300+ is a bit much to spend on a long lens.

I think the best part about these adapters is being able to use different lenses. The slight quality and light loss make it worth it, especially with the "film-like" image you can achieve.

Dancamfx wrote:

Thanks for the list. I watched that video again and noticed that at the end he uses a 55mm polarizing filter to connect and align the def adapter horizontally. It wasnt on the parts list so is it nessesary?
The polarizing filter isn't necessary. Basically he is telling you to get a threaded ring to connect the adapter to the camera. If it connects to the filter, why can't it the camera? I suppose it might not rest horizontally? I haven't gotten that far yet. Once you finish the adapter, buy the cheapest filter you can find to make this work because you are actually removing the filter or glass part of the actual filter. I heard one method being to put the filter in a plastic bag and using a hammer. The actual ring is usually strong while the glass isn't.
Posted: Sat, 28th Jul 2007, 5:25am

Post 17 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Thanks for clearing that up for me Serpent.
Posted: Sat, 28th Jul 2007, 12:25pm

Post 18 of 42

dungmeister

Force: 0 | Joined: 13th May 2007 | Posts: 13

Member

oh ok so correct me if Im wrong but you reccommend I buy a:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 lens
or a
Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 lens
or both?

The whole 28mm and 50mm thing whats the difference? I mean do I need to change lenses if I want to zoom in on something or what?
It's just I want to make sure that I'm doing it right lol
I dont want to stuff this up cause its precious money I saved for a while.

oh and should the lensbe auto or manual focus?

thanks
jojodungy
Posted: Sat, 28th Jul 2007, 3:19pm

Post 19 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I think I'd start with the 50mm lens. Though a 28mm lens would be much better for indoor, especially in tight situations. It's hard to reccomend one over the other because they serve such different functions. Though you'll get better quality out of 2 cheaper primes than 1 more expensive zoom. Basically if you want to zoom, you will need to have a zoom lens (see the FredMiranda site I posted.) Unfortunately these DIY 35mm adapters are not electronically engineered and Autofocus will be a useless feature, despite more EOS lenses having it. So if you had a zoom lens, you'd have to zoom and have another hand (maybe someone elses) controlling the focus.

Most camcorder lenses are just bad, but varied range zoom lenses. That's why you can zoom in or pull back wide. A photography lens on an SLR camera that would cover that kind of range would be at least a few hundred dollars. If you get different functioning prime lenses such as 50mm and 28mm, and then maybe a slightly lower quality but just as expensive zoom that covers 70-100+mm lens to cover any zoom or long shots you need to do, you should be well off. Think about what you'd need most and think about buying used, especially if you get a zoom. The reason primes are better quality than zooms of the same price is that the lens makers focus on making it sharp at 1 focal length while zooms have so many moving parts. Primes are almost always sharper and some cheap primes produce proffesional quality on SLR cameras.

As for "the difference" beteween 50 and 28mm, let me just explain the "mm" thing and you should understand it.

The "35mm adapter" is named that because it can get the DOF of a 35mm motion picture film or SLR still camera.


(Don't bother scrolling over, the last camera is a digital handicam camcorder and obviously produces a deep DOF. Don't waste your time. Image by MediaChance.com) In this image, ignore the "mm". That is referring to the lens :: sensor size ratio I think. The point is the first 2 cameras are film cameras, the 3rd are pro/am camcorders like the GL2 and up, and the last one is your typical consumer camera, even the higher end ones.

The 50mm has to do with the focal length of the lens. This is more "zoomed in" than the human eye. A wider angle, such as 28mm or less, will get a deeper DOF but is used for wider shots, like a landscape for example or those wide epic shots you see in films, or for indoor shooting where you need to get more of the shot in the frame and you don't have much room. I believe the human eye is 30mm+. I'm not exactly sure, and I can't seem to dig it up, but use that guess as a reference. Something like 100mm+ will be longer shots, or more zoomed in.

I'm not sure exactly why, but 50mm lenses seem to be brighter lenses, which is why I reccomended it above the others. It has a lower f/stop value (wider aperture) and can get you a thinner DOF and shoot better in lowlight.

As I said, the more "zoomed in" the thinner the DOF. The closer you are, the close you focus, the thinner the DOF. Example: If you used a wide angle lens on this metal moon ornament and focused on it, your DOF would still be pretty deep but you get the wider angle of the scene:



Now the subject is framed identically but with a longer lens:


(Image by DVXUser Barry Green)

See how you can utilize each for different functions? A 50mm lens will do more justice to the 35mm adapter than the 28 because it is more zoomed in, and it has a wider aperture. If you wanted the wide shot, you could even remove the 35mm adapter, but the footage might look a bit different, so I reccomend buying a cheap wide angle lens and you'll still be able to get a decently thin DOF in certain situations if you ever need it.

NOTE: The zoomed in, closeup thing applies to ANY lens. In other words, to get a thin DOF on your camcorder, you could back up a lot, zoom in a lot, and focus on the subject as close as you desire. This effect can be dramatic, but only really use it when you should. Don't shoot a whole film like this to get thinner DOF. If you watch ANY film shot on 35 or 16mm film, it's not completely shot with thin DOF, that would just be silly wouldn't it? There's a time and a place.
Posted: Sun, 29th Jul 2007, 3:12am

Post 20 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Nice Diagram there Serpent.
Posted: Sun, 29th Jul 2007, 4:10am

Post 21 of 42

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Stand back more.



















Now, zoom in. wink
Posted: Sun, 29th Jul 2007, 9:03am

Post 22 of 42

dungmeister

Force: 0 | Joined: 13th May 2007 | Posts: 13

Member

Thanks a heap serpent your the man. Helped explain everything better than they do on that other website. Well i never did read the full site about DOF.

thanks again
jojodungy

Oh and by the way would you consider this to be a good lens

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&viewitem=&item=190135496621&rd=1&rd=1

?

thanks
Posted: Sun, 29th Jul 2007, 8:37pm

Post 23 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I know nothing about old photography lenses. Though if I were going for an old lens, I'd go for a Nikon. They were the best back then and you can find amateur bright 50mm lenses cheap. Before you buy any lens, look for comments about it. Give it a google search and I'm sure some older photographers will say things like: "Oh yeah, that Nikon f/1.8 50mm lens was the stuff back then..." or "The Nikon f/1.8 50mm lens was a nightmare. It's all about the f/2.0 50mm." I completely made that up, but you get the point. I'd really go for Nikon though. If you have lens questions I could really only give you vague/general tips like that, resources and websites, technical info, or I know a fair bit about modern Canon lenses specifically.
Posted: Sun, 12th Aug 2007, 1:30am

Post 24 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Ok guys Ive received all the parts for my adapter and I ran into some problems that I think everyone who's considering building an adapter. The Canon EOS Macro extension tubes that are a big part of the adapter do not fit Canon FD lenses, only EF lenses. If you already own the older FD lenses like myself, you will need to buy an adapter for around $40. I'll keep everyone updated on how the building process go's.
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 3:57am

Post 25 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Ok guys Ive contructed the 35mm adapter but Ive run into a problem. Im having trouble focusing the camera on the focusing screen. The only way I can focus on the focusing screen is if I zoom out a little, but then I have a small black border. What Can I do to fix this?
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 4:28am

Post 26 of 42

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Pull the screen further away from the camera's lense. Or get a better macro.

Your problem is that the focal length of your camera isn't great enough to focus on the screen as close as it is with the zoom as zoomed as it is.

A better macro would help solve this, and pulling the screen down the tube within range of the focus would also prove a good remedy. Either way, you'd be altering the focal distance.
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 6:00am

Post 27 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

ben3308 wrote:

Pull the screen further away from the camera's lense. Or get a better macro.

Your problem is that the focal length of your camera isn't great enough to focus on the screen as close as it is with the zoom as zoomed as it is.

A better macro would help solve this, and pulling the screen down the tube within range of the focus would also prove a good remedy. Either way, you'd be altering the focal distance.
Ok I'll try to move it further away. What do you mean by a better macro?
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 6:08am

Post 28 of 42

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I don't know much about the process of building a 35mm adapter, but if I recall it requires a macro lens.

The macro is the lens that lets the camera see things that are REALLY close to it. A better, more well-made or finer macro would allow objects on either end of the lens to be placed closer to it than a cheaper macro would.
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 7:20am

Post 29 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

So you don't get confused:

Ben is referring to a macro lens that you screw on to the front of your camera threads, and the adapter is added to that. There are sucky $20 ones and some people buy two of them and stack them. I don't know the exact combo. There are nice ones by Century Precision Optics for $100-$200 that prevent chromatic abberation (if you add crappy Asian brand ones, you will get chromatic abberation.) Anyways, the macros let you focus on closer things, kind of like a magnifying glass. Hoya makes an $80 that I'm sure is pretty good. There is a way to make them using Binoculars, but the lenses would have to fit around your GL2's lens in diameter. Technically these would be used to focus closer on subjects if you wanted to add a macro lens to a regular camera without interchangeable lenses, but here it will allow you to focus on your focusing screen.

Here's what one would look like:


Chromatic abberation causes blue and red edges on certain lines and contrasts. It's considered a lens distortion:


The other kind of macro lens will is the SLR macro lens that you put on the other end of your adapter. These focus closely on things in the real world (made for closeups) and they usually are very bright lenses that can produce razor thing DOF.

Photo macro lens:


This is the part of the 35mm adapter I fear the most. I am buying all my parts this week for a short I'm about to do. I'll tell you what option I select, and it is not going to cost me more than $50.
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 3:42pm

Post 30 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

So if moving the focusing screen away from the lens doesnt work I may have to buy a Macro lens too? This sucks, I followed the video on jetsetmodels and Im gonna be pissed if I have to spend more money, Ive already spent $150.
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 5:11pm

Post 31 of 42

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

No one said it was gonna be cheap. The whole reason the XL cameras and professional cameras have interchangable lenses is because this screen method sucks for quality and is totally unnecesary if you have lenses which match your ccd size.
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 11:11pm

Post 32 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Kid wrote:

No one said it was gonna be cheap. The whole reason the XL cameras and professional cameras have interchangable lenses is because this screen method sucks for quality and is totally unnecesary if you have lenses which match your ccd size.
As a matter of fact I was told it was gonna be cheap, Around $100 USD. Now im getting pretty close to double that. But If I can get this thing working with the things I have it will be worth the time and money.
Posted: Tue, 4th Sep 2007, 9:36pm

Post 33 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Ok so I talked to daniel, who created the 35mm adapter plan, and he told me I may need a macro lens or achromat which a couple of you guys already mentioned. So once again Im gonna be spending more money on something I know nothing about. mad

I searched for Macro lenses for my canon gl2 and I found this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=280149728233&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=018

What do you guys think about this particular lens? Good or Bad?
Posted: Tue, 4th Sep 2007, 10:14pm

Post 34 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I personally don't know what magnification you would need to focus on the screen. I know some people ended up stackin two 7x macros. But this created sometimes harsh chromatic abberation. Others bought the expensive achromat. I never saw someone buy a decent quality 10x one, but it could work. I wouldn't say it's "good," but it should work and the 7x ones people were buying were $14 each. The lens you posted is the kind of thing you're looking for, but no one can be sure that's the magnification you need, really. I'd buy it and if it doesn't work return it and you might have to stack macros or go for a higher magnification. I guarantee you the one you are buying will have an ever so sligh chromatic abberation on over exposed edges, but it could be hardly noticeable (it's hard to say as it varies from lens to lens.)

Also, if you plan on winging it, study the store's return policy. I've been screwed over once buying a $30 thing from a camera store.
Posted: Wed, 5th Sep 2007, 12:47am

Post 35 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Thanks Serpent. Yeah Im pretty sure 10x should be ok but what I really want to make sure is that it is worth the money. Im short on funds as it is.
Posted: Wed, 5th Sep 2007, 3:49am

Post 36 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

If it focuses on the screen with little-to-no distortion, then it would be worth the money. Unfortunately there are so many of these kinds of lenses I'd have to say it will be pretty much impossible to find advice on that specific lens. Though if you confirm it as a thumbs up part, that will definitely be the one I pick as well. Good luck.

EDIT

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/47st_Photo

47st Photo is a really iffy ebay user. ALWAYS look a seller up on Reseller Ratings. Especially if the word "street" is in the name. All of those places are dinky little electronics stores in NYC and they run really shady businesses. You will get your product, but if you try to return it, say "bye" to that $50 you just spent. Try and find the same lens or a similar lens (same magnification and description) from a reliable site. Even "Jim's Photo Stuff" on ebay could very well be reliable, just make sure you read all feedback and checkout the seller on ResellerRatings.
Posted: Wed, 5th Sep 2007, 4:35am

Post 37 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Well Im a big ebayer and I always check the feedback before purchasing but I didnt know you could look up ebaystores in resellerratings. Nice find! Im gonna check my local camera shop first and see what they think and then i'll most likely buy it. Thanks again serpent.
Posted: Sat, 13th Oct 2007, 4:29am

Post 38 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Ok so I bought the Macro lens from ebay with no problems and I was finally able to finish my adapter. I couldnt be happier with the result but I must warn anyone who is interested in this DIY project that it is Very Difficult, alot harder than I thought. Below is a pic of the adapter on my camera and some pics taken with my Gl2 with the adapter on.

NOTE: I took the pics in a hurry to show you guys. I used no special lighting so they're kinda dark and I used the Photo feature on my camera, which we all know is poor quality, so its kinda grainy. The final result when shooting video does not have the grain you see in the pictures.







If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Posted: Sat, 13th Oct 2007, 4:48am

Post 39 of 42

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

How long did it take you to make this, realistically?

Were you totally devoted to making it?

If someone were really devoted to making one, about how long do you think it'd take?

What was the final cost?

What were the final materials?

Did you use any paint or adhesives or anything supplementary to create it?

What kind of lens and what settings on the lens do you have?

Is it rotating, vibrating, or static ground glass?

Are you using a Nikon D screen?

Will you post up video? If a server is the issue, can I host it?

I know this is a lot of questions, and I don't expect you to answer all of them, but I figured I might as well post up all my questions in the event that you do answer a few of 'em.
Posted: Sat, 13th Oct 2007, 5:52am

Post 40 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Ben3308,

Here are the answers to your questions.

How Long did it take to Make it?

It took me about two months to make. That includes ordering the parts, waiting for the parts to arrive, and running into a few problems with focusing the camera onto the FS. If it wasnt for the focusing problem it would have probably taken a month. The actual assembly took 2 days.

Were you totally devoted to making it?

Yes, I was. I do alot of DIY projects and I do them one at I time so I can devote as much time as possible for that project.

If someone were really devoted to making one, about how long do you think it'd take?

Well put it this way if I had all the parts ready to go, including the macro lens, I could build it in one day. So as long as everything goes according to plan and the person making it is handy with this kind of stuff it should take a day.

What was the final cost?

The final cost was around $220 USD. But keep in mind that I already had the 35mm lens and I had to buy a AF to FD adapter to fit my old Canon FD lens.

What were the final materials?

The final materials are as follows:

- Two EOS tube kits
- Two Hoya Multicoated UV Filters
- One Canon Ee-A Focusing screen
- One Opteka 10x Macro Lens
- One Canon 35mm Lens
- One cheap 55mm UV filter from best buy (Remove Glass)
- One 58mm to 55mm step down ring
- One Focusing screen GG holder
- One Canon Brand 58mm UV filter (May not be necessary)
- One Canon Brand 52mm UV Filter for the 35mm lens (optional)
- FD to AF 35mm lens adapter (Only necessary if you use an old FD 35mm lens like I did)

Did you use any paint or adhesives to create it?

Yes, I used a hot glue gun to secure the 2 hoya uv filters in the EOS tubes and I used some superglue to secure the cheap 55mm lens i got at best buy to the EOS tubes. No Paint was used.

What kind of lensand what settings on the lens do you have?

My lens is an old Canon FD lens I got from my grandfathers Canon AE-1 that he passed down to me. The aperture setting on the lens is 1.8 .

Is it rotating, vibrating, or static ground glass?

The adapter is static.

Are you using a Nikon D screen?

No, mine is a Canon Ee-A screen.

Will you post up a video?

Yes I do plan to upload a video. Ive been so busy lately with class and work its been hard to find time, but I hope I'll be able to soon. I'll let you know when I get one and yes it would be great if you could host it for me.

Let me know if you have any other questions.
Posted: Sat, 13th Oct 2007, 10:56am

Post 41 of 42

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

WOW. This turned out great. I was really hoping yours would go smoothly because you followed the tutorial I am following. I am very pumped to finish ordering my parts. Can't wait to see some video. Nice work on building it. It looks great on the camera and the resulting image is fantastic.
Posted: Sat, 13th Oct 2007, 5:21pm

Post 42 of 42

Dancamfx

Force: 2558 | Joined: 7th Sep 2006 | Posts: 873

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Serpent,

Thanks, Im very pleased with the way it turned out. Though I did follow the same tutorial that you are using, I made some changes/ improvements that made assembly and matenance alot easier. When you get all the parts let me know and I'll help you through it.