Canon XH-A1 with Letus 35mm Extreme Adapter

[cjleslie2190]

I'll get right to the point.

I have a Canon XH-A1 and am using a Letus 35mm Extreme Adapter to get a different look and increase depth of field.
I have practiced a lot with different shots, but my shots are just not up to par with what I've seen other people do with my exact camera and same Letus adapter. My shots have a stronger depth of field, but are grainy and crappy to say the least and it's very difficult to get just the right settings to have a "okay" shot. I wonder what I'm missing?

I know things like shutter speed need to be low when using a 35mm adapter. I believe I am also setting gain and filter properly to fit the lighting/scenery. Can someone give me a little list of settings and things to check before shooting. Have you seen the youtube videos of people using these adapters? They're amazing. Maybe I'm using a crummy lens? Could that be it?

Here is exactly what I am using:

Canon XH-A1 ---attached to--- Letus 35mm Extreme ---attached to--- Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G (Iris Fully Open)

I greatly appreciate your help! Thanks you!

[Cornucopia]

Of the top of my head, I'd say:
1. The Nikon 18-55 is a very pedestrian lens optically (I should know, I've got it and can't wait to get a better one!)
2. Check your focus on the Canon (not talking about the other focus on the Nikon, which you should check also), I'm guessing the Canon should probably be set to infinity, to blur out any of the grain from the Letus Adapter (which would happen if focused closely/macro).
3. The Letus adapter is supposed to DECREASE your DoF, not increase it. To do that, you need a lens that (other than the Nikon you now have) will open up much further: say, to 1.4-2.0. Not just 3.5-5.6.

Scott

[newpball]

I have a Canon XH-A1 and am using a Letus 35mm Extreme Adapter to get a different look and increase depth of field.

You use this adapter to increase DOF?

[cjleslie2190]

Sorry decrease, you know what i meant!

[newpball]

3. The Letus adapter is supposed to DECREASE your DoF, not increase it. To do that, you need a lens that (other than the Nikon you now have) will open up much further: say, to 1.4-2.0. Not just 3.5-5.6.

Indeed!

3.5 is not very open and the second problem with the 3.5-5.6 is that it is not a constant aperture zoom lens, so even if you go 3.5 and start to zoom you will have a disaster coming, let alone losing focus and awkward and non-linear zoom action you get for free with a photography zoom lens.

To do things good you really need a cine lens, if you are on a budget you can use a photography lens but at a minimum I would say you need a constant aperture one. And if that is also too expensive stick to primes.

[cjleslie2190]

Thank you Scott

[cjleslie2190]

Can you guys suggest one specifically that i should get? Like model and everything

[newpball]

Can you guys suggest one specifically that i should get? Like model and everything

Your main problem is the Canon XH-A1 which has a fixed lens. In the end adapters will only make life harder.

If you are doing video and think of things like DOF I think you are ready for a camera with replaceable lenses.

Try to get a good deal selling the Canon (but hurry tapes are about to enter the museum) and get a good DSLR or a camera with a MFT connection.

[cjleslie2190]

Thanks newpball. Ive heard DSLR videos are not the best for video, thats why I was wary in the beginning but ill look into it

[newpball]

Thanks newpball. Ive heard DSLR videos are not the best for video, thats why I was wary in the beginning but ill look into it

Actually for shallow DOF videography they are generally better because they tend to have a larger sensor. The issue with DSLR is that unlike camcorders nothing is built-in, no filters, no easy zoom or focus, etc. So you wind up needing a cage for serious work.

[aedipuss]

stick with good prime lenses for video. a decent starting lens is the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D. and make sure it's the D lens not the other 50's.

[Cornucopia]

3. The Letus adapter is supposed to DECREASE your DoF, not increase it. To do that, you need a lens that (other than the Nikon you now have) will open up much further: say, to 1.4-2.0. Not just 3.5-5.6.

Indeed!

3.5 is not very open and the second problem with the 3.5-5.6 is that it is not a constant aperture zoom lens, so even if you go 3.5 and start to zoom you will have a disaster coming, let alone losing focus and awkward and non-linear zoom action you get for free with a photography zoom lens.

To do things good you really need a cine lens, if you are on a budget you can use a photography lens but at a minimum I would say you need a constant aperture one. And if that is also too expensive stick to primes.

Not quite right, and once again, not necessarily a "disaster". Variable aperture lenses are the norm, Constant aperture lenses require very much more complex & larger (read $$$) lens element combinations.
AND
Constant vs. Variable has nothing to do with the ability to maintain (or not) one's back-focus when zooming. There are plenty of normal VZ lenses that keep the back-focus.

@cjleslie2190, please take newpball's hyperbolic rantings with a grain of salt. DSLRs can be used to shoot quite good video, in the right hands with the right preparation (but without TOO much extra gear). I know this firsthand. However, much depends on WHAT and HOW you intend to shoot. Some things DSLRs are NOT the best for. And this choice is also a wholly different matter than issues of CCD vs. CMOS and Global vs. Rolling Shutter.

I will agree, unless you have a specific need to use the zoom feature WHILE shooting a scene, you'll get better optical performance for a better price by sticking to a few good quality primes at selected FoVs (say, a 24mm WIDE, a 50mm Normal, & a 150mm Tele), plus it's likely they'll be faster (larger max f-stop) for better shallow DoF. Not gonna go into models, because they all have their pluses & minuses, and people's priorities with them are different, so one man's trash...

Also, it seems you've already seen that, even given the XH-A1's foibles (AVCHD compression, smaller sensor size, etc.), others have been able to get the look you're after, so don't give up hope. However, one should always look into the TCO of the thing - if it cost ~$2k for the cam and ~$4k for the adapter kit (unless you got the bare bones), you could have instead gotten a BMD-CC and a few good lenses for around the same price, and have had an overall much more "cinematic" outcome.

Scott

[newpball]

Constant vs. Variable has nothing to do with the ability to maintain (or not) one's back-focus when zooming.

Correct and, letting alone the other problems, the disaster is the exposure.

[Cornucopia]

Again. No "disaster" (you really seem to want lots of disasters in your life, Chicken Little).

Exposure is easy to compensate for. Click (ISO/gain, or ShttrSpd), done.
Plus you are ignoring the fact that many "variable focus" lenses or only variable around their most open f-stop. For example, if you take a 1:3.5-5.6 zoom and start with fully open f-3.5 at its widest and then zoom in, it will dim to fully open f-5.6 at its most tele, but you could also start with 5.6 at the widest, and then zooming in may keep at 5.6 for some models which compensate (in AutoAperture or AutoProgram mode), or you can manually open to 5.6 for those which DON'T compensate.

Scott

[newpball]

Exposure is easy to compensate for. Click (ISO/gain, or ShttrSpd), done.

I am sure some people are masters at handheld (like holding the camera in the hand, not shoulder or steadycam) while zooming and adjusting exposure at the same time. Unfortunately I am not one of them!



Changing shutter speed will give other (potentially) disastrous side effects. Doing anything else than 180 can certainly be creative but changing it while zooming?

Plus you are ignoring the fact that many "variable focus" lenses or only variable around their most open f-stop. For example, if you take a 1:3.5-5.6 zoom and start with fully open f-3.5 at its widest and then zoom in, it will dim to fully open f-5.6 at its most tele, but you could also start with 5.6 at the widest, and then zooming in may keep at 5.6 for some models which compensate (in AutoAperture or AutoProgram mode), or you can manually open to 5.6 for those which DON'T compensate.

True, however we are talking about shallow DOF situations right? Going 5.6 all the way is not going to give you much of that. And then still while the F stop may be constant is the T stop constant enough as well?

[smrpix]

And then still while the F stop may be constant is the T stop constant enough as well?

Seriously?

[Cornucopia]

T-stops are just F-stops corrected for the absorbance & reflectance properties of the lens, and will always fairly closely mirror the f-stop setting (though usually slightly offset under due to the inevitable light loss). No need to bring that deflection into the discussion, especially when most users here are metering TTL, which is already light-compensated.

Scott

[newpball]

Throw a Rokinon 85mm T1.5 on a DSLR and see what a picture you get!



You simply can't do this with your average camcorder.