1:4.5 too small for a 35mm adapter lens?

[Ben Winter]

Would a 75-200mm zoom 1:4.5 lens work for a 35mm adapter? Or is that not enough light allowance? I'd hate to have to invest in something I already have...And if it wouldn't work, does anyone have any suggestions as to a good lens to get?

[Cody Dulock]

if you use a lense with an F stop that big 4.5... you lose a good amount of light and the lens would generally only be good for outdoor applications.

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

I have had problems with increased grain contrast and vignetting at smaller apertures (f4-5.6 and up), so you might have trouble, but I'm sure it varies. Also as Cody mentioned, it's very very difficult to get enough light indoors with that much light loss. Also consider that its possible that a 35mm lens at f4.5 might not be that far off in DOF from an equivalent 1/3" DV lens at f1.6 since larger aperture translates to shallower DOF. 35mm lenses with very small apertures and (deeper DOF) seem to somewhat defeat the purpose of using such an adapter in the first place.

Ive had enough trouble getting enough light indoors to shoot with a f1.4 35mm lens. Personally, if you want something useable I wouldnt use a lens with a max aperture smaller than f2.8 due to the problems I've listed. I suppose a 75-200 zoom wouldnt be too useful indoors except for closeups, so you must be planning to use your adapter outdoors anyway?

[Ben Winter]

lol...Well, it's the only 35mm lens I have and I was hoping I wouldn't have to fork out more money for a new one...but I guess they're not that bad on ebay. Any recommendations?

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

I bought 3 35mm lenses on ebay for cheap, all primes and all under $30. Problem with still 35mm lenses is they breathe a lot (the image actually changes in size when you rack focus, sometimes even looks like the camera shakes, not ideal for cinematography). Prime lenses are generally cheaper and easier to get with large apertures than zooms, especially 50mm primes. Actually if you are really concerned with money, you could potentially get a cheap fast 50mm (f1.8 or less) lens and never take it off the adapter. Then, use that wherever possible to get shallow DOF, and then when you need something wider just shoot without the adapter since at wide FOVs you wont be getting shallow DOF anyway. Just shoot some tests to make sure you can match the footage with and without the adapter.

I shot a short mainly with a 50/1.4 and a 28/2.8 and realized later that I could probably have shot without the adapter instead of using the 28mm lens since using it only degraded the image an cut the light and didnt give me any shallow DOF anyway.

Also, if you are stuck with one prime lens youll have to get used to moving the camera whenever you need to change framing and having no control over fov (and perspective).

[Ben Winter]

would this work?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEWN%3AIT&rd=1

its 50mm f1.4.
What adapter are you referring to?
And what kind of fstop would you recommend for a zoom lens?

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

oh sorry, by adapter I mean the whole 35mm adapter.

that lens looks pretty good to me, a lot like the one I have except thats one of the older models with the metal mount. As I said, it breathes a little bit, and the metal models are sturdier but heavier. The old models can be better since the switch that allows you to use the iris adjustment (normally locked into place by a part on the Canon still camera when twisted into the bayonet mount) can just be pushed and clicked into place. For my newer lenses I had to cut a piece of plastic to wedge the switch into place (canon also sells a part that is used to lock it in place, but im not sure thats easy to get ahold of).

My guess about zoom lenses would be get the fastest lens you can without spending too much. It's always better to have the option of shooting wider open apertures, but not if it costs 3x as much for an extra fstop. I think zoom lenses might be fairly reasonably priced down to f2.8, any faster and youll probably have to pay 100s of dollars.

[Daves Spi]

Do not agree with you at all. Remember F4.5 @ 70 is not the same as F4.5 @ 35. Sure it will work, I used it in all tests and videos I posted before.

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

I'm not sure I get what you mean you disagree with. When I say 35mm lenses I am referring to the 35mm format not the focal length, sorry if I was confusing about that. I know DOF it is focal length independent.

[Daves Spi]

F4.5 gives you less light, and little bit less DOF. But at 70mm its good enough.

This is taken under low light with 70-200mm at F4:
http://web.datriware.com/files/284_n06.jpg

And in thread "Finally we did it" you will find some night movie.