I am using a Tiffen Macro 7+ 10+ and still getting colour separation when focused on lights/lamps - is this an SLR problem or a Macro problem or something else? Thanks

would you describe the color sep?

It could be chromatic aberation. It would be good to use a lens designed for video 3CCD/prism combo

that shouldn't matter when using a 35mm adapter.

There could be two sources of this aberration:

1) The 35mm lens itself
2) The macro lens

You'll have to experiment to determine which it is. One way would be to shoot the same scene with different 35mm lenses and see what happens with regard to color.

The CA should come from the macro that is designed to work with film cameras. The prism/3CCD combo requires a different lens.

Ah! Ok I see your point now. It's certainly a viable claim.

Look here at a side by side test done with a Fujinon broadcast (video) lens and a Zeiss lens (not a "cheapandnasty").
This is with a hacked Sony FX1 HDV camera, so the CA is more prominent because the higher resolution.
With a SD camera setup, the CA could be less visible:
http://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/ziess_fuji.htm

What I mean by colour separation is that when I point the camera at a lamp, for example, on certain angles and mostly long shots, the light from the lamp seems to glob and turn a different colour from the other parts. In other words, it doesn't look natural.

What I mean by colour separation is that when I point the camera at a lamp, for example, on certain angles and mostly long shots, the light from the lamp seems to glob and turn a different colour from the other parts. In other words, it doesn't look natural.

Oh ok...so it's not the typical red color near the edges of the picture(chromatic abberation), as some are getting?

I'm still not sure what's happening though...

What type of lamp is this? I've pointed the camera at a flourescent before and it turned green, along with changing the color of the rest of the scene.

Does the image look fine in the viewfinder but not in the footage? It may be a blowout/compression problem.

Just some ideas.

The footage I have shown does not have the separation (maybe there is some confusion there). I will have to get some footage with it and I think it will be abundantly obvious.

I am also noticing some blurring on Trees for example, I am not sure if it is my Macro 10+ or something else. The GG looks really good without the camera in front, but when I take the footage, a tree for example, will look great on the trunk, but the branches will seem to soften and blur. Not sure why...any ideas?

is the macro, Uncoated lens. Try a 1.6X teleconverter instead (from a photo store) and see if it makes a diff.

I am not sure if it is uncoated or not - but I am starting to believe that the hotspot is what is causing the problems - causing the blurriness as it spreads from the center of the lens. I will look into the Teleconverter and see if it will work with my camera - the macro is Tiffen, I am not sure if that is a good company or not.

Also, I have a TV Tele Conversion Lens 1.5X, but it seems way too small to work. Actually, I am not really sure what it does?!

Look trough the +10. As you get it further away from the table /hand, you should see the same as in video.
Tiffen is a good company but optics have their own rules.
Any converter (IF it is a converter) should give you a "clue" even if the size is not suitable for your front mount camcorder.

Ok, what I meant to say is the converter lens is really really small! The lens is about 1/2 inch across in this big housing. Not sure why though it would be sooo small.
I have to hand it to you Dan, your device kicks butt compared to mine. I don't see vinetting on your, I don't see the striations or the wobbling and I don't see the hotspots. Nice clear and wonderful looking. Good job.
As for me, I am still trying to get rid of the little problems along the way that you have already solved. As soon as I get rid of the hotspot, I can start working on the working version to actually shot something.

Hey Dan,

Here is a picture of my converter :


http://dvstuff.250free.com/convert.htm

IS this what you are talking about?

No Leo, that is indeed a converter but goes behind the lens.
I was talking about this one:

http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/prodv/xl1/16x_tele-converter/index.htm

Ok, I will look into that. For now, here is the blurriness problem I am talking about.

http://dvstuff.250free.com

I have it down to few causes :

1) I am not zoomed in far enough - therefore getting the blurriness from the CD spinning near the edges of the frame.
2) hotspot causing blurriness (hence the need for a condenser)
3) Bad CD/GG

Any more suggestions?

If you can get a sharp image (in the center) the CD is good enough.
Hotspot will always be there using a GG instead of a Fresnel focusing screen.
The hotspot however will be less obvious when extracting a smaller section of the image in the center like 18/24mm or so.
Zoom in the image, move the camcorder farther away from the GG and stay away from any CU lens (if possible)

I am in the process of trying another GG to see what transpires. Right now I am using the Macro 10+, the camera about 4 inches away. I really can't get farther away with that lens - but I will try with the 7+ and see what happens.
Do you have any idea why it would be doing this Dan? Nice and crisp in the center but blurring at the edges?
PS - I am zoomed in as far as I can go right now.

A quick update :

http://dvstuff.250free.com

I have changed the 10+ to a 7+ and it is definitely and noticeably better. I am wondering why a macro lens would do this?
Should I get a less amount, maybe a 4+ to get even cleaner and sharper image??!?

The stronger the lens the more distortion and softness you will get towards the edges. Just one of those trade offs really. You can get highly corrected lenses but these usually cost a fair amount of money (though they can provide superb results).

Try it, but the tele-converter will get you "closer" WITHOUT the color fringes. (no short cuts for a good image) Test one in a retail store and see if it makes a diff.

I just called a store and they said they don't have a tele-converter for my DV cam (which is a 43mm thread) and when I asked for a step-down ring for it - he said they didn't make Tele-converters that small...so I am not sure whether he just doesn't know what he is talking about or what.

Drop down to the 7+ and wow! What a difference! This is great. Now I am getitng what I want -- clear and crisp. I am going to send back the 10+ 7+ and get the 1+2+4+ and see the results.

Here is a still of the 7+, still major hotspoting which I want to get rid of and some vignetting - but alot better. Going to buy a condenser lens from Anchor optics and see if this helps.

http://dvstuff.250free.com

And one more update with a video as well. It is getting better, but still the hotspot issue and maybe Focal Range - check out the trees in the very background (jpg) - does that look like my Focal length is out a little bit?

Leo,
that looks familiar.....
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/Brightnes-tests/IMGA0249
Best you can do is zoom-in and move the camcorder as further back as you can. A condenser lens will not remove the hotspot. Save your money. Only Fresnel focusing screen does that. Buy one, (it will be a big revelation), or get a second hand SLR (whatever the brand) and remove the focusing screen, see the diff.

Ok, I will look into a Fresnel screen, but aren't they quite expensive? Do you have a source or a url for one? Where in the mix should I put the Fresnel screen as well?

1) ACTION > Fresnel > GG > Camera

2) ACTION > GG > Fresnel > Camera

Thanks

Are macro's supposed to do this or look like this without the DOF lenses?

http://dvstuff.250free.com

I am again at a standstill. When I use the 7+, I get better sharpness and less blurriness, but then I get vignetting because I cannot focus in far enough.

Leo,

1 Macro is for close-up image not for landscape (like reading glasses that some of us start using at one point)

2 Fresnel IS the GG!
ACTION>35mm lens>FRESNEL>Camera

3 They are not expensive. The best is Beattie @ $85. You can buy less expensive but.... you get what you pay for. It WILL take care of the hotspot!!!!!!!!!!!

I have done enough explicit testing with pics and clips on my site. (Some people asked my why does my site look the way it does....) I have start wondering why as well.........
Check them out while they are still there:

http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/albums/Brightnes-tests/fourth_brightness_test_avi.wmv

http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/albums/Brightnes-tests/brightness_test_of_four_screens.wmv

each @ 1Mb

One ordinary GG, one very fine grit GG, one ordinary Fresnel screen and the brightest is Beattie.

I understand now what you are saying, but finding a way to get it to move/oscillate is another matter. I would love to find a beattie and use it, but will they cut one that will fit like a CD?

>>>>finding a way......<<<<<

yes,...that is true.
to shake or not to shake.......
I have done what I have done for I do not know any better....
The biggest they make is 60/60mm.

I guess that is why your device is such a enigma (in a good way). You have managed to come up with something that I cannot emulate in my wildest dreams! For that I salute you.

But for me, I am going to have to try and find a Teleconverter 1.6X to use instead of the macro (but I was quoted a $200+ price tag - much higher than I want to spend). I am having too hard of a time trying to get it to work. I like 7+, but it is not enough for me AND 10+ has too much blurring at the edges. I can't win it seems. I guess I am going to have to deal with well-lit situations and a condenser to even out the hotspot because that is my only way to fix my problem - with the unit I have. Yes, if I decide to build an oscillating unit, I will go with the beattie/fresnel. I had an idea for an oscillation, but I don't know if it will work or not.
Tonight, I opened up my unit and re-measured the CD to the unit so that it was equal all distances around- tomorrow I am going to remeasure the focal range (it is a lens for a Nikon camera, so I am hoping I can use the 46.5mm range).

Do you think this would work as a teleconverter :

http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30059&item=3879623487&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW


Thanks

Leo,
I salute you as well for trying as hard as you are. That is true merit.
Well lit or poor lit, any GG will give you a hotspot (if it is spinning, you will not see the grain, however, the light loss of some 2 stops is there and the hotspot is still there)
The converter of eBay is for Canon lens. You can use that mounting a Canon lens on it and then, the converter on an SLR Canon camera. If you have a 1.8/50mm lens, the converter will make it into a 4/100mm lens. It will not work on your camcorder.
What camcorder do you have?

Dan,

I have the PV-DV852 from Panasonic. If I win the bid for the item, I will have to fashion is somehow to work with my camera, though I don't know how.

Also, if I buy a frensel or beattie, although I know it won't get rid of my hotspot, will it spread the light out more evenly if I put it between the GG and the DV camera? Doesn't a condenser do the same thing as that?

That item will not help you in any way. $1 is wasted.
dv852 should work without anything. good luck.

Ok, a dollar wasted if I bid on it - not a bad return.

But will the Beattie or the Fresnel help me spread the light out more evenly? (again knowing that this is not the ideal way to go, but it is all I have for a spinning CD DOF machine right now).

If the frensnel is integrated with the GG, I would think it gives a terrible effect in oscillating motion. The fresnel is something like a compressed lens, so it would be like shaking a lens.
Also, because a fresnel acts really like a lens, you'd better use a real lens, without the cirkels.
Dan says you'll never get rid of the hotspot. I don't have hotspot that I can't get rid of in post.

How did you get rid of it in post?

Oscar,
you have a good point here about shaking an actual lens. If you move an image carrying lens by 1 mm, the image it is producing will also move some distance. So the oscillating or vibrating motion will actually blur the image by the amount of the movement or a proportion thereof. Sure, you eliminated the grain problem, but you've thrown out the baby with the bath water. Perhaps this is why we have yet to see an actual *sharp* image through a Frsnel lens? Everything posted so far looks very soft. Perhaps I missed a sharp video posting, where the low bit rate isn't masking an overall out of focus condition?

As far as fixing hotspots in post, yes, field flattening can be done with a gradient matte in post. However, because we only have eight bits to start with, we can only fix minor hotspots.

-Les


<<<-- Originally posted by Oscar Spier : If the frensnel is integrated with the GG, I would think it gives a terrible effect in oscillating motion. The fresnel is something like a compressed lens, so it would be like shaking a lens.
Also, because a fresnel acts really like a lens, you'd better use a real lens, without the cirkels.
Dan says you'll never get rid of the hotspot. I don't have hotspot that I can't get rid of in post. -->>>

Ok, Gradient Matte in post. What program is best suited for that? If I am understanding correctly, a gradient circle going from the center - white to black or black to white?

Here is a recent grab I made :

http://dvstuff.250free.com

Spinning GG vs. Press and Seal. Both unacceptable. I am using about 55mm on these shots, but both are terrible in my opinion., Working on moving the camera towards and away to get better shots. Also, these shots are completely zoomed in and I find that it is a little worse because of it. Going to zoom out a bit and see what happens.