hey guys,

I just need confirmation on something.

Do you need a Macro lens for the 35mm adapter, IF my camera lens is only 43mm (panasonic GS-400).

I asked on a thread before and someone said NO. However, I have completed my version of the Agus (rotating CD) and the image seems too small...so I'm assuming i need a macro. I'm hoping that maybe someone can tell me a method though. (So far I just put the cam as close as possible, and zoom in as much w/o blur...the image on the gg seems small?!)

I've followed every instruction/advice on the forums and website (mediachance), and have a focused image on the gg. I am also using Nikon AF lens.

Also, would a PCX/DCX lens take the role of a macro lens? I'm thinking of getting one of those instead since they seem to dissipate hotspots, etc.

Appreciate any input, thanks.

Goh

looks like there no need for that on GS200. Try the camcorder's lens 4-5" away from the GG and zoom-in, see what happens. You should get a sharp image. If it does not fill the screen, try a +3 or +4 CU lens. Good luck.

thanks,

btw, whats a cu lens? condenser?

thanks.

Goh

ps..also i have gs-400....gs-200 has 37mm lens...if this makes a difference

CU=close up.
only CU size (37 vs 43) Get what you can find and step up/down rings.

I just ordered a 7+ 10+ macro yesterday for my PV-DV852 from Panasonic. I found that I could not get rid of vinetting without using a macro. But if others have done so on the GS200, I can't see how the GS400 would be any different, consider it is the next step-up model.

I have GS400 and macro lens are needed. When you draw 24x18mm rectangle, you get it full when you place paper straight on cameras lens :) The sharpest & closest image you get when zoom change from 2x to 3x. This is the point, where you can get sharpes image on very close objects.

I broke some old Pentacon 135 lens and use first as macro lens. Has no aberation or other artifacts. Works cool.

Ok, are you saying that 7+ is going to be too much?

That entirely depends on the camera :)

The store that I am ordering it from has both a 1+2+4+ Hoya adapter kit and he is ordering me a 7+ 10+ kit as well. I will have to test both and see.

Save your money. I have +1, +2, +4 and +10.
Use none for GS200. Most you may need is +4 (on GS400 IF EVER)
Keep a GG/SLR lens infront of your eye (close) Major vignet!!!
Take them 1 foot away.... see the dif?
Try the GG further away from the lens to get ridd of vig and zoom-in. Use CU only if anything else fails.
Your problem is the small image 18/24.

I've got the PV-DV852 Panasonic, so I don't know how it compares with the others. It is about 2.5 years old, but I got it last year on a close-out sale at B&H.

I don't know how feasible having the camera 1 foot away from the GG is when making this device - it would elongate it quite a bit, BUT I know what you are saying. Right now it is about 5-6 inches away from the GG and I still need to zoom in - but I can't zoom in far enough without it blurring, so I need the Macro.

Also, are people just using the Fresnel pieces to get rid of the Hot-spots? Does this go between the DV camera and the GG?

ACTION >> GG >> Fresnel >> Macro/DV camera

Thanks

Fresnel IS the GG. Focusing screen as in SLR cameras. That solves the vigneting (hot spot) and you can get a 24/36mm clean and clear image. See http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/Brightnes-tests
for details and watch the first two clips!
A bigger (than what you have now) screen may not need that much zoom-in and may work without CU.

Ok, but I am using a Spinning CD. I don't know how to get a bigger/larger circumference spinning CD than the production ones. Is that what you are talking about?

No.
a CD will limit your frame size to what you have. No bigger, no brighter. Even a 2X supersized CD would not give you a brighter (and bigger) picture. Is just a spinning GG.

thanks guys,

will look into getting a macro then...seems like +10 would be way too much.

Mandy, curious to see which Macros worked best for you.

Also, still curious about DCX/PCX lenses...what exactly do they do?

Would I still need one if I get a macro? Or would they act as a type of macro...do they have magnifying properties?

thanks,

Goh

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.

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 ;)

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?

Leo, not necessarily. If the camera is not zoomed at all, I may have a bit of a wide angle distortion.

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!

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

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...

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.

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!

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.

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.

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?

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)

IS that the same as a Condenser lens? The achromat?

Yes it could be used for that :).

Ok, for 8 bucks it isn't a bad deal. I saw another condenser one that looks like this :

http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/l3136.html

It says it is a : Glass aspheric condenser lens, 1-3/4" diameter by 1 inch back focal length. Aspherics offer superior aberration correction for light concentration that would normally require several spherical elements.

I don't know enough about optics to figure that out - I actually don't know achromatics do, but I think Condensers spread the light out evently - now, what does asperic condenser do?

Aspherics typically help with corner distortion.

It may be just me, but that 1 3/4 diameter is going to be too small, I'd think. The abberations are worst nearest the edges of the lens. If I were buying a new condensor (which I will be soon), I would go larger -- probably something in the 60mm or larger size. This way, you're using a more central part of the glass. With 1 3/4, you're barely (if even) going to cover a 35mm image. Also, I'd recommend a focal length fairly near to the distance between your camcorder and the condensor. In other words, if your camcorder is 60 mm back from your condensor (6cm), then get a 60mm F.L. condensor. Frankly, I haven't found this to be critical, but its a good rule of thumb. If its a very short F.L. the lens is much more curved and you'll get a lot of curvature distortion (straight lines will bow). If its a very long F.L., the lens is much more flat -- and just doesn't offer as much correction. I believe perfect is exactly matching your distance from the condensor.

Try anchoroptical.com. Something along the lines of:
http://www.anchoroptical.com/Products/Display.cfm?catid=255 Item number: AX75359 (coincidentally also $8) would be pretty good. Vary the f.l. as listed above. At that price, you could try a couple.

Frankly, I haven't bought from anchor, but they're overs from Edmunds Optical which makes absolutely beautiful (and expensive) scientific glass. I'd think these would beat the heck out of those found at surplus shed.

Thanks Jonathon, I think I am going to get that one. I also was looking at Prism at the Surplus shed which had prices that were very reasonable considering the prices of DOVE prisms that have been floating around the forum lately. I am very out of my league when it comes to optics, so maybe the surplus shed ones are too cheap to be any good?

By the way is the Anchor one a Achromatic or just plain condenser?

Good luck, and let me know how the Anchor stuff works out. Again -- I haven't purchased there, so buy at your own risk :)

I've never come across a dove prism with a large enough entry/exit face -- sure the long sides are plenty big, but most have like 10mm end faces.

Are you sure you don't want to simplify and just flip the image in some sort of alternate viewfinder solution? The extra optics are going to reduce the amount of light and be yet another area needing precise alignment, etc... I'm not sure what kind of cam you have... but most others have found that by carefully placing a magnet (somewhere) near the LCD -- it trips the inversion circuitry (which happens when you rotate the LCD away from you), such it's rotated when facing you. This completely solves the problem. It doesn't work for my cam -- so you'll have to dig the other threads to find the location of the magnet.

Also - you can add a separate viewfinder and rotate that. Old b/w pro-CRT viewfinders are beautifully sharp and cheap on ebay (I bought one for $9 and its fantastic). I _much_ prefer it to the LCD - even if I could flip it.

Sorry - missed your question. Those anchor PCX lenses are straight up PCX, not achromats. Occaisionally they have achromats -- but again, if you can stay in the middle of the glass, it may not be a problem for you... it'll take experimentation.

Has anybody tried to build a DIY remote focus mechanism for the DOF machine? It isn't that bad to focus with your hands, but would be much easier to focus using a motor-cycle handle based focuser (sorry I am not sure what these are called, I used then when I worked in a TV station).

Follow focus:
http://www.cinetechonline.com/FF01.html

Is that the one that you created Dan? I remember seeing something on your site that was a focus follower...

No, that is just a follow focus by cinetech.
What I have done is a visual feedback for the focus puller to "SEE" where he is focusing the camera.