Letus35 Sony HDR-FX1 sample footage

Jay Rodriguez · October 31st, 2005, 07:59 AM

I'm concerned too now.... I ordered one last week.....

Quyen Le · October 31st, 2005, 12:08 PM

I don't think the distortion problem is camera related or at least not that much. I believe the SLR lens that Kyle shot with is 18-55mm lens and it has some degree of distortion on it's own because of wide angle. I don't say my adapter has no distortion but if you have problem with distortion, when placing the order, you should say distortion is your concern, then I will make it to the minimum for you. Thanks.

Quyen

Leo Mandy · October 31st, 2005, 01:22 PM

Great news Quyen , for those people out there. I think we forget that out of all of the adpaters so far, Quyen seemed to have produced the best image for the lowest price which is something awesome. Again, Quyen is just beginning the foray in the world of DIY 35 - give him 6 months and he'll be P+S direct competition!

Rafael Lopes · October 31st, 2005, 05:10 PM

I agree, and I still have high hopes for it. Even with its' problems I still think most (not all) of the footage I've seen looks way better with the adapter than with out it (specialy the one shot with the vx2100).

Kyle Edwards · October 31st, 2005, 06:15 PM

Yes, the shots with the lens at 18mm has major distortion because that is just how the lens is at that mm.

But even when the lens is at 55mm there is some. Right off the bat Letus35 has minor distortion. I'm going to do more tests when I get the time and sun. Hopefully I can get to it this week.

I may have a way around the distortion and I will keep the lens at 50/55mm.

Leo Mandy · October 31st, 2005, 08:08 PM

Where are you seeing most of the distortion?

Yasser Kassana · November 1st, 2005, 03:39 AM

Sorry guys - n00b here, what exactly is distortion?

Noah Yuan-Vogel · November 1st, 2005, 12:04 PM

I'm not a fan of diopters or condensers, most of the diopters ive seen produce a lot of chromatic abberation and condensers produce barrel distortion. Seems like probably any cheap ones (or any available retail at all?) will have that problem? I dont think ive seen a homemade adapter yet that didnt have pretty heavy abberation.

wow ben, whats wrong with yours? that picture looks terrible, looks pretty soft, perhaps you arent focused on the ground glass correctly? or maybe its just not focused well?

Oh yeah, distortion is... when the image comes out distorted? most of these adapters probably have some barrel distortion, where lines that are really straight look curved, bent outwards toward the edge of the screen. I guess the biggest sources of distortion in 35mm adapters are the condenser lens, and in general, wide angle lenses?

I bet chromatic abberation can be corrected in post too. distort the blue channel maybe? (diopters seem to give blue abberations toward the edges i think) or rebuild the scene in maya and render out new chroma channels? :P

youd likely lose resolution correcting distortion in post, since pincushioning would change the shape of the frame and youd have to digitally zoom the image so your frame didnt have weird curved edges.

Noah

Jeff Phang · November 1st, 2005, 03:58 PM

wow, that looks pretty good for a relatively slow lens at 3.5

Kyle Edwards · November 19th, 2005, 06:33 PM

New lens, Nikkor 50mm 1.8

http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/7845/0306wt.jpg

http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/305/0506xb.jpg

With Adapter
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/7426/0405on.jpg

W/O Adapter
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/5884/0700hd.jpg

With Adapter
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/5742/0902hg.jpg

http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/7913/1005td.jpg

W/O Adapter
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/8115/0806fb.jpg

The last shots have the HDR-FX1 zoomed out a bit. It was easier for the camera to focus on the GG. It seems the GG is a tad too close to the camera for a sharp focus. I'll play more with this theory. Also the images are gamma corrected (quickly) and slightly sharpened.

The major distortion is gone, it definitely was the DX lens I was using. Next is to figure out how to get rid of the unfocused edges because of the macro filter.

Michael Maier · November 19th, 2005, 07:56 PM

It's sure much sharper without the adapter. I like it much better without.

Kyle Edwards · November 19th, 2005, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Maier

It's sure much sharper without the adapter. I like it much better without.

Then kiss DOF good-bye.

Jimi Colteryahn · November 20th, 2005, 12:36 AM

Hello!
I don't think using a Nikon DX lens will work with a Letus. DX lenses were made for digital cameras and not for Full frame digital or film cameras.

For instance, say you fitted a DX lens to a film camera, you would get the same distortion. A DX camera takes the photo more from the middle of the frame. For instance, you would expect massive distortion with my 12-24mm DX lens, but there isn't because a digital camera crops the image off.

I checked out my Letus35 with my Nikon lenses and it appeared ok. The fast primes looked wonderful. Don't even try it with Nikon macro lenses. The depth of field is razor thin with my 105mm micro nikkor.
Jimi

Michael Maier · November 20th, 2005, 05:41 AM

I just meant it looks really soft for my tastes. It seems that the adapter basically converts your footage back to SD resolution, since it's so soft in those shots. But I have seen sharper Letus35 footage, so it might be something with your particular set up. I know it's not a thing from DOF adapters in general, since the P+S Mini35 looks really sharp with HD.

Kyle Edwards · November 20th, 2005, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Maier

I just meant it looks really soft for my tastes. It seems that the adapter basically converts your footage back to SD resolution, since it's so soft in those shots. But I have seen sharper Letus35 footage, so it might be something with your particular set up. I know it's not a thing from DOF adapters in general, since the P+S Mini35 looks really sharp with HD.

I wouldn't say SD resolution but yes it does soften the image alot. Watching the footage on my TV the footage looks pretty sharp, compared to the computer that is. I'm not sure what it is about the softness. The Letus35 footage on a PD150 looked really sharp. It could be the focusing of the FX1 to something that close or could be the GG used in my adapter. I know that the GG stops down the light a decent amount but as far as sharpness, I'll have to do other tests. Like I said before too, could be my macro filter. Too many factors involved right now to decide right away.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimi Colteryahn

Hello!
I don't think using a Nikon DX lens will work with a Letus. DX lenses were made for digital cameras and not for Full frame digital or film cameras.

I know, that is what I was saying. The DX distorts the image. I forgot at first about those lenses being made just for DSLRs.

October 31st, 2005, 12:08 PM	#17
Quyen Le Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 356	I don't think the distortion problem is camera related or at least not that much. I believe the SLR lens that Kyle shot with is 18-55mm lens and it has some degree of distortion on it's own because of wide angle. I don't say my adapter has no distortion but if you have problem with distortion, when placing the order, you should say distortion is your concern, then I will make it to the minimum for you. Thanks. Quyen __________________ Affordable Adapter http://www.adapterplace.com

November 20th, 2005, 12:36 AM	#28
Jimi Colteryahn Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Rep. of Panama Posts: 34	hii Hello! I don't think using a Nikon DX lens will work with a Letus. DX lenses were made for digital cameras and not for Full frame digital or film cameras. For instance, say you fitted a DX lens to a film camera, you would get the same distortion. A DX camera takes the photo more from the middle of the frame. For instance, you would expect massive distortion with my 12-24mm DX lens, but there isn't because a digital camera crops the image off. I checked out my Letus35 with my Nikon lenses and it appeared ok. The fast primes looked wonderful. Don't even try it with Nikon macro lenses. The depth of field is razor thin with my 105mm micro nikkor. Jimi

October 31st, 2005, 07:59 AM	#16
Jay Rodriguez Regular Crew Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 80	I'm concerned too now.... I ordered one last week.....

October 31st, 2005, 01:22 PM	#18
Leo Mandy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 749	Great news Quyen , for those people out there. I think we forget that out of all of the adpaters so far, Quyen seemed to have produced the best image for the lowest price which is something awesome. Again, Quyen is just beginning the foray in the world of DIY 35 - give him 6 months and he'll be P+S direct competition!

October 31st, 2005, 05:10 PM	#19
Rafael Lopes Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Rio de Janeiro Posts: 1,240	I agree, and I still have high hopes for it. Even with its' problems I still think most (not all) of the footage I've seen looks way better with the adapter than with out it (specialy the one shot with the vx2100).

October 31st, 2005, 06:15 PM	#20
Kyle Edwards Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: LI, NY Posts: 274	Yes, the shots with the lens at 18mm has major distortion because that is just how the lens is at that mm. But even when the lens is at 55mm there is some. Right off the bat Letus35 has minor distortion. I'm going to do more tests when I get the time and sun. Hopefully I can get to it this week. I may have a way around the distortion and I will keep the lens at 50/55mm.

October 31st, 2005, 08:08 PM	#21
Leo Mandy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 749	Where are you seeing most of the distortion?

November 1st, 2005, 03:39 AM	#22
Yasser Kassana Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: UK Posts: 223	Sorry guys - n00b here, what exactly is distortion?

November 1st, 2005, 12:04 PM	#23
Noah Yuan-Vogel Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City Posts: 613	I'm not a fan of diopters or condensers, most of the diopters ive seen produce a lot of chromatic abberation and condensers produce barrel distortion. Seems like probably any cheap ones (or any available retail at all?) will have that problem? I dont think ive seen a homemade adapter yet that didnt have pretty heavy abberation. wow ben, whats wrong with yours? that picture looks terrible, looks pretty soft, perhaps you arent focused on the ground glass correctly? or maybe its just not focused well? Oh yeah, distortion is... when the image comes out distorted? most of these adapters probably have some barrel distortion, where lines that are really straight look curved, bent outwards toward the edge of the screen. I guess the biggest sources of distortion in 35mm adapters are the condenser lens, and in general, wide angle lenses? I bet chromatic abberation can be corrected in post too. distort the blue channel maybe? (diopters seem to give blue abberations toward the edges i think) or rebuild the scene in maya and render out new chroma channels? :P youd likely lose resolution correcting distortion in post, since pincushioning would change the shape of the frame and youd have to digitally zoom the image so your frame didnt have weird curved edges. Noah

November 1st, 2005, 03:58 PM	#24
Jeff Phang Regular Crew Join Date: May 2005 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 34	wow, that looks pretty good for a relatively slow lens at 3.5

November 19th, 2005, 06:33 PM	#25
Kyle Edwards Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: LI, NY Posts: 274	New lens, Nikkor 50mm 1.8 http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/7845/0306wt.jpg http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/305/0506xb.jpg With Adapter http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/7426/0405on.jpg W/O Adapter http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/5884/0700hd.jpg With Adapter http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/5742/0902hg.jpg http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/7913/1005td.jpg W/O Adapter http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/8115/0806fb.jpg The last shots have the HDR-FX1 zoomed out a bit. It was easier for the camera to focus on the GG. It seems the GG is a tad too close to the camera for a sharp focus. I'll play more with this theory. Also the images are gamma corrected (quickly) and slightly sharpened. The major distortion is gone, it definitely was the DX lens I was using. Next is to figure out how to get rid of the unfocused edges because of the macro filter.

November 19th, 2005, 07:56 PM	#26
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	It's sure much sharper without the adapter. I like it much better without.

November 20th, 2005, 05:41 AM	#29
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	I just meant it looks really soft for my tastes. It seems that the adapter basically converts your footage back to SD resolution, since it's so soft in those shots. But I have seen sharper Letus35 footage, so it might be something with your particular set up. I know it's not a thing from DOF adapters in general, since the P+S Mini35 looks really sharp with HD.