|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 14th, 2005, 08:19 AM
|
#16 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 749
|
I have looked in the DCX and it looks like a good substitute for a macro (maybe) if you camera can zoom into the DCX and focus on it. My only real concern was the fact that it is made of plastic (you can buy a ton of them for around $4.00). It might be made of only cheap plastic and therefore you won't be getting the crisp quality of glass - but I am only speculating. If you can find some cheap, go for it - it is only a few bucks.
|
|
|
|
February 16th, 2005, 11:41 AM
|
#17 |
|
Tourist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 1
|
I've tried the cheap plastic...full of scratches and imperfections AND the image looses a lot of brightness. BUT you get good magnification for cheap ;)
__________________
Nimpsy ++ |
|
|
|
|
February 19th, 2005, 05:08 PM
|
#18 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 749
|
Finally got my MAcro 7+ 10+ today. the 10+ is too much and won't work. The 7+ is good, but the camera has to be about 4.5 inches away from the GG - which is too far for my Project box. So, I don't know if I should take this back and go for the 1+2+3+ macro (7+ altogether) and try that and see if a smaller macro (1+2) closer to the GG will yield the same results. I also noticed that even though I have 10+ optical zoom, the more I zoom, the less details I get. Maybe that is the same for all DV camera, but I am not sure. Trying to get my camera as close to the GG as possible, right?
|
|
|
|
|
February 19th, 2005, 05:54 PM
|
#19 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium)
Posts: 735
|
Leo, not necessarily. If the camera is not zoomed at all, I may have a bit of a wide angle distortion.
|
|
|
|
|
February 19th, 2005, 06:26 PM
|
#20 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 749
|
Yeah, I am testing out a couple of different approaches and they all lead to one conclusion, that my DV needs to be 4-5 inches away from the GG to work, which is not a good thing!
It works for my prototype box, but not my project box which is 3 inches deep! I might have to continue to source a bigger project box, which I didn't want to do because I had a hard time getting even this one. I don't know how James Hurd is doing it with his Micro35 (his camera look pretty close to the GG), but maybe it is because they are bigger cameras/lenses that he is setting it up for. My DV will not work in close to the GG because of major vinetting. Well, again, back to the drawing board on this one. I really get jealous of those people that put their DOF machine's all together in one or two night. This contraption is alot more difficult for someone like me who doesn't know what the heck I am doing most of the time! |
|
|
|
|
February 19th, 2005, 09:03 PM
|
#21 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 108
|
Take a look at this for extending/adjusting the distance between your DV lens and the project box:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=33520&is=REG This will fit a 58mm or 67mm filter thread (use step-up rings if your lens is smaller); you'd need some epoxy or hot glue for your project box (on the other end). If you need a bigger one, the RB67 model takes a 77mm thread. I have the RB model, and it has dual rails, a geared extender, and a lock. Think I paid $100 for it at KEH on line. (So far I just use it on my Mamiyas, not for video...) You can usually find these used if you shop around. Don't know if that will help, hope so! --MC |
|
|
|
|
February 19th, 2005, 09:29 PM
|
#22 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 375
|
Mandy, don't sweat it...
Yeah, like mediachance guy was nice for giving the hints and pics, but like 4 hrs? Yeah right. It took me an hour tonight just to take the CD player apart as delicately as possible... hey, I know I just need the motor but I'm still being careful.
If you're a handyman/whiz kid with electronics, I guess sure this project looks mickey-mouse - but fact is it requires precision. What kills me is that if this idea is feasible/semi-good, why hasn't some semi major production model been mass-produced? I mean, after all, they make electric-bike conversion kits for people who can't afford proper motorcycles... so why hasn't this been seized upon on a bigger scale. Yeah, I'm a filmmaker - I find the tinkering fun but I know I'm not exactly the best when it comes to precision with tools so I expect some parts of this project will be a bit of a struggle - and of course, if you goof, well, you have to start over... I invested in a decent macro extender for my 72mm mini-dv video cameras - I tested with a frosted CD and I think it will work - now I'm starting to build the prototype... need better boards and RadioShack for me doesn't have the big project boxes - I'll build something custom out of wood - that way if the macro I have needs a bigger box, so be it... I have to look back now and understand how to wire the CD motor. Like I'll have to borrow a solder gun I guess... Okay, mediachance guy says only 1 AA battery actually needed for the motor??? So like, guess the 2 batteries together are needed for full functionality of working CD player... motor only needs 1??? Ah, interesting times ahead, I'm sure... |
|
|
|
|
February 19th, 2005, 10:11 PM
|
#23 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 749
|
Michael, thanks for the tip, but waaaay too expensive!
Mark, you don't need a soldering gun for this! The CD is really simple. What I did was take apart the gears that run the second motor for the laser (the one that moves the laser to from the center to the edge of the CD). 1) After that, you only need to find the two wires that lead from the CD motor out. There are two and it doesn't matter if you mix them up. 2) Once you have the two, follow the wires to the opposite end of the CD motor (you don't want to cut the wire at the CD motor point because then you WOULD have to solder). 3) Take the loose ends and using a box cutter, measure about 1 cm or so and cut around the plastic, but don't cut the wire (this takes some careful concentration, but if you cut the wires, you have to start over, another cm down the wire. 4) Once the wire is exposed, pinch it between your thumb and fingers and twist it together until it is tight (your descretion on tight). Do that with both 5) Now, if you have a battery box from Radio shack, it should have a) two wires coming off it b) two eyeholes to attach the wires to. 5A) If it has two wires coming off it - do the same for the wire ends and then take the red wirefrom the CD player (or whatever colour it is) and the Red wire from the battery pack and twist them together - put black electrical tape to cover them. Do the same for the second wire. 5B) Easiest route if you have two eyeholes, just thread them and twist until they won't accidently loosen. Now take a small piece of electrical tape and cover. 6) Put the battery in and test. If it does not go - switch the wire sequence (it is better not to be the black tape on or twist the connect wires too tight until you know it works) Hope that helps, any other questions, just email me. Back to the thread! Ok, I totally hear where you are coming from, because I am in the same frustrated boat. Instead of a slick and nice project box for my DOF machine, I am going to have to use crappy looking Wood - which I don't want to use! I am starting to sound like a broken record when I say - I don't understand how they... - but there you go. The guy at MediaChance didn't use an extender or the like, but his worked fine. Jonathon at Aqua-web didn't use an extender and his worked fine too. Maybe just bad luck for the type of camera I have, but I need at least a 6 X 6 X 6-5 inch (deep) project box. Guess what? I can't find them anywhere. And when I have found a site that sell ABS enclosures - they don't overtly list the specs in their 10+ pages full of different types - so in essence, I would have to click of the 30 on each page, to hopefully discover one that was the right dimensions. Yeah, I am venting. I am pissed off that I won't give up on this. My testing tonight was positive with the new macro. The macro 7+ works great, but again, needs to sit at least 4.5 inches away from the GG. My focus to infinity seems a little off, but I am not going to worry too much about it anymore. That is life. I really just want to start shooting. Next step, if I exhaust all of my avenues for an ABS enclosure is designing the rail system to attach to the tripod. |
|
|
|
|
February 19th, 2005, 10:27 PM
|
#24 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 375
|
Mandy, thanks for your help...
I'll try according to your instructions...
the mediachance guide is waaay too simplified "Oh, and I attached the battery... Next step..." I hear your frustrations. I am starting to experiment with my macro - well, guess what - macro distance to the ground glass plays a part too, I'm sure! This is somewhat downplayed and I tell you, there's an optimal zoom range for the macro to work the best and have as tight a focus on the image on the GG... Jonathon's pics at aqua-web I think reflect a truer sense of how this project might really come out and if you look at micro35 early prototype pics, it's a bigger set up... I don't get either how it's been refined to something so small... Mandy, I'll start emailing you - I think we're thinking along the same lines on this. I think I totally get your thinking when you post "what happened to the agus 35?" Even mediachance just "drops off the face of the earth." I know! Everyone who undertakes the 35 mm adapter project gets started, reaches the point where they make tremendous headway at last and post pics etc. They get excited and dream up wild schemes of commercial production. And THAT is when the aliens swoop down and snatch those people away and they are never heard of again, forced to work as camera slaves on Neptune and Pluto... Well, I'll get back to work on my mini35. I suddenly have an urge to make a mountain out of my mashed potatoes... see you all later... Na noo Na noo... I know what you mean about the wood. I'm going with wood first to make an enclosed prototype - it's easier to twist screws through wood to get more precise distances looked off for the various boards, etc. I kinda think it's tacky too - oh well, just think of it as an homage to those old wooden-box cameras from the pioneer days. Or as an homage to a '60's station wagon with the wood trim! Radioshack is too commercial to sell the project boxes they say they have - maybe I'll eventually hunt down something from an electronics wholesaler/outlet type place... First I want to just get "up and running" and get excited with some footage. My macro is amazing (it should be - I paid $230 for it!) and I think the Glad Press'N Seal for the frosted CD is going to work - it's very similar to the mylar Jonathon has reported tremendous success with and his footage is the kicker so far in terms of really showing what a good attempt can pull off... Why does some footage with "rack focus" tend to "zoom" a bit whereas others (especially James Hurd's demo clips) don't at all and just change focus...? Do you know what I mean? While email is a great idea, I'm happy to post here openly so that others can read the posts and learn and offer us suggestions... ciao for now! |
|
|
|
|
February 19th, 2005, 11:12 PM
|
#25 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 749
|
Mark,
Can you give me an example of which footage is opposite of James's footage? When I rack focus, it looks a little like a zoom just because things come into focus from a blur, hence looks like a zoom, but they stay the same. When I turn my manual focus ring, the rubberized part doesn't turn - nothing but the focus ring moves. Maybe a little more info might help - if I can't help, I am sure Bob Hart or others will be able too. Also, I think I might be going with a coffee can or something cylindrical instead of the project box. Just an idea I had tonight - that way I can get the depth, but it will present a whole new set of challenges. Mediachance and Agus, yep - don;t know where they went. I posted on the Mediachance board for someone to get me in touch with the DOF person - no luck. The Close Encounters reference was sublime. Tell me more about the Press and Seal. Right now I am still working with Frosted CD, but looking for a better way. Yep, email me if you want ( mandyyjobs AT yahoo DOT c,o,m,) but if you want to keep it on the board, that is fine too. |
|
|
|
|
February 20th, 2005, 02:27 PM
|
#26 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 182
|
Breathing Focus
Most lenses 'breathe' when you adjust the focus. This is the slight 'zoom' effect seen when doing a rack focus. Different lenses do it to different degrees. Cinema lenses (for movies vs. Still SLR work) take more of an effort to minimize this, while still lenses (the ones most of us are using on our adapters) make very little effort to solve this as still photos don't 'rack' :)
It's completely a function of the 35mm lens you stick onto your adapter... some are better some are worse. |
|
|
|
|
February 21st, 2005, 04:01 PM
|
#27 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 749
|
Do you think this will work as a condenser lens?
www.surplusshed.com They seem to have really inexpensive stuff, but I am not sure which one to pick! Under the search box, type in Condenser. Any suggestions? |
|
|
|
|
February 21st, 2005, 04:17 PM
|
#28 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 804
|
This one might work:
http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/l1333.html However, by the looks of them, not worth the s&h. +4&+2 CU works on all PD170, DVX, XL1 and Z1. Most smaller camcorders will not need CU (see GS200) |
|
|
|
|
February 21st, 2005, 05:04 PM
|
#29 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 749
|
IS that the same as a Condenser lens? The achromat?
|
|
|
|
|
February 21st, 2005, 05:13 PM
|
#30 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 587
|
Yes it could be used for that :).
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
