I have a Canon GL2. I like the idea of having a more cinematic DOF available to me for my films. I was wondering if it was worth it to purchase one, and what you would recommend for the GL2 that's less than $400. Or, is there is something better to spend ~$400 on for the GL2 than a DOF adapter?

Also, if I get a 35mm/DOF adapter, will I need to buy anything else to make it fully functional, such as a lens? If so, what do you recommend?

Thanks a lot!

you can get a letus35 for $300 then a nice 50mm or 24/35-80mm zoom to go with for under $100.

other than that, you could also get a mic thats better than the onboard and a beachtek to go with.

Also, do these adapters really offer a better solution than just, say, zooming in to a point of desired DOF? Do the adapters offer results that are different than zooming in? (Not compressing the depth of the image, not having to stand further away, etc.)

In addition, you said a 50mm lens. The GL2 is native 58mm, wouldn't that work better, or is there a specific reason for going with a 50mm?

Thanks again

Also, do these adapters really offer a better solution than just, say, zooming in to a point of desired DOF?

yes. though the image won't be as sharp as zooming it, it will allow you to shoot with the camera close. no standing 50 feet away to get the same framing.

another great advantage is that a 35mm adapter adds the ability to have interchangeable lenses at a fraction of the cost.

In addition, you said a 50mm lens. The GL2 is native 58mm, wouldn't that work better, or is there a specific reason for going with a 50mm?

The entire point of these adapters is to use manual SLR lenses with them to acheive the DOF of an SLR camera. You have to have a lens to go with any of these adapters. Otherwise, you'd just be filming a blurry translucent ground glass.

Once you put one of these adapters onto your camera, the GL2's lens becomes essentially useless--that is, you don't zoom in or adjust focus. That becomes the job of the new manual lens that these adapters let you use. Follow?

That's right, Ben, but I wouldn't say "useless." It must present and functioning correctly. Perhaps a better word is "locked down" or something.

I was refering to the threading size.

Also note that if you zoom in, the background imagery gets magnified along with the subject. This is not the case with the use of a smaller DOF lens, where you keep depth both in the focusing and in the relative size of the background and subject.

What do I need to know about buying a lens system to go with the Letus35? Is Canon FD or Nikon AI a better choice?

I'm surprised to find very few lenses with f-stops that are smaller numbers. Seems most of the zoom lenses are around 3 or 4, and only a handful of non-zoom (50mm) are f/1.4. Can anybody provide some more information or a resource for what I should know about buying a lens?

Thanks

I was refering to the threading size.

I don't see how that has anything to do with what lens you use then.

I was mistaken. I often get the focal length and the thread size confused, since they are both measured in mm with no other identifiers.

Hello Chris,

very first thing You have to be concerned is Your camcorder's MFD(minimum focusing distance). To use DOF adapter natively(without adding achromatic diopters) should MFD remain under 100mm. Most manufacturers support that distance(ask it from manufacturer additionally). Your camcorder, GL2, should have a small MFD(not sure 100%), so You,re lucky at this point.

Second is Your camera mount. Usually it depends of Your camcorder's filter thread size(the number You mentioned 58mm). Most common thread sizes are: 43, 52, 58, 72mm. So You're lucky here as well.

Third is Your photolens. What lens You planning to use. Sometimes people have something in their garage from old 35mm photo times. Each lens have mount to attach lens to potocamera's body. This is also used to attach Your lens to Your DOF adapter. Here DOF adapter act photocamera's body. In other words DOF-adapter must have support to Your photolens. Most common mounts are: Canon FD, EF, Nikon F, M42, Minolta MD, Pentax K .

Max iris size. Don't use photolenses with max aperture under 2.8. First because You're about to missing the point of adapter(if Your idea was to achieve shallow dof). Second, you'll experiencing problems at less than 5.6 - noticeable grain etc (some manufacturers claim that their adapter don't have - their joking :) ). To get rid static grain at small iris sizes is option to use moving GG adapters (like here mentioned letus35). But You'll expierencing then maybe some other problems. Best is to use 2.0 - 1.8 photolenses.

Good Luck!

I have a GL2 and a 35mm adapter and I'm really satified with it. I think the GL2 is the perfect camera for 35mm adapters because the 58mm thread is close to the SLR lenses size (52mm). See some clips here: http://www.kokokaka.com/35mm

I have a GL2 and a 35mm adapter and I'm really satified with it. I think the GL2 is the perfect camera for 35mm adapters because the 58mm thread is close to the SLR lenses size (52mm). See some clips here: http://www.kokokaka.com/35mm

The DOF in those clips don't really seem to be much more shallow than what the GL2 already has. Would the Letus35 provide different results?

Chris, I think you may be misunderstanding DOF a little. Zooming in will not decrease your DOF. Only a larger target (35mm imager) or larger aperature can do that. Zooming in merely creates the effect of shrinking the DOF. The problem with that approach is that it also compresses the distance, distorting sizes and making everything look flat. The advantage of having 35mm DOF is that we can maintain the sense of depth without having to have everything in focus at the same time.

I understand that. I was just checking to make sure that's not what the adaptor did, provide a permanent telephoto lens.

Though, I'm not particularly impressed with the change of DOF in the clips provided above. In fact, those don't look any different than what my camera currently produces. In light of this, I will probably not be getting a DOF adaptor at this time. Intead, I'm going to use that money towards hardware upgrades so I don't have to wait all day for Premiere to render.

In fact, those don't look any different than what my camera currently produces.

what GL2 do you have? The difference in DOF is astounding in using vs. not using the adapter. I can put a pen tip in focus at close range and keep the wall 2 cm behind it out of focus with the adapter, and I have yet to acheive anything near that with the GL2.

The videos don't look like they have a very shallow DOF at all. The DOF I witness in those videos looks pretty standard considering you're focusing from very far to very near. I've seen the DOF from other cameras and it looks pretty amazing, but this barely looks different!

chris.. there's no way your gl2 can provide anything close to the dof that any of these clips provide.. that would be impossible.. unless of course your camera was aquired through some wishes to a genie.. i would really like to see some of this magic footage that you have shot. Obviously the footage on this board (which i find to be quite amazing) is not selling you on this concept so you should try to make your own cheap adapter. Thats what i did. a soup can, some melted wax on a uv filter and see what you come up with. or keep on filming with your magic camera and its magic DOF.. because obviously your 3 chip prosumer camera does something that no other digital camera in the world can do..

Listen, I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything, so don't treat me like I am. I have seen many of the videos on the site and they look incredible, but the videos in the link posted a few lines ago don't seem to live up to the rest. Since they were shot on a GL2, it makes me doubt the effectiveness of the adaptor on a GL2.

sorry chris... just trying to be truthful abou the capabilities of your cam.. i just sold my gl1 so i know what the gl series is capable of. the gl2 will have the same dof with the use of these adapters as any camera will.. the camera wont change that aspect.. you're using the camera to film what is projected onto the screen. you could use a hi-8 camcorder and it will get the same dof as any other cam with an adapter.. just not such a pretty image but same dof.. perhaps the problem in the footage you have seen lies in the adapter..

Thank you. I am aware of the limitations of my camera, but the videos I am specifically talking about seem to have a fairly standard DOF for their distance. The one with the child and the toys appears to have a shallow DOF. However, if you stick a few objects very close to the camera then of course the things behind it will be blurry. But, in relation, the videos of the guy skateboarding really don't seem to have a very shallow depth of field at all. The only indication of that is when he rack focuses to the leaves. Which again is very close to the camera.

In any event, maybe I am mistaken about how shallow the DOF really gets with one of these adaptors. Many of the videos I have seen and enjoyed were shot in low-light, and perhaps the objects were very close to the camera. These videos show objects distant from the camera in bright situations, with what appears to be relatively deep DOF (deeper than I would have expected/wanted.)

it depends on the focal length and aperture of the lens used. These adapters will give you the same control over dof as people shooting with film have. most people that own 3 chip cameras for filmmaking purposes want to mimick the same feel that film gives.. if that aspect of filmmaking is not important to you then these adapters are not for you.. but if you do want more control over the storytelling proccess then these adapters have that capability

Chris, this is because the camera was either stopped down in aperture or a smaller glass lens was used, i.e. it should have no reflection on the effectiveness of the adapter, only its capabilities to handle both shallow and deep DOF. Oftentimes completely shallow DOF is undesirable since so little is in focus at one time. Stopping down the aperture brings more into focus at the same time, which is what went on in those clips. Following a skateboarder is quite difficult I'm sure so the aperture was stopped down to make pulling focus easier.

In summary, those clips' lack of DOF have nothing to do with the GL2, only the user's personal preference in the operation of the manual lens fitted on the end of the adapter.

good job ben.. i guess my magical camera rebutal wasnt very effective.. but then again i am sitting working in a call center at the moment... rebutals rebutals rebutals...

You are absolutely right chris...you can get very similar results to that footage (kind of)...stop frothing guys and let me explain. I've just finished my 35mm adaptor build for my XL1s. I also have a JVC DVL-GR820U. I can get focus on my thumbprint on both of these cameras and have the sides of my thumb be out of focus. The problem is that I get a thumb print on my lens when doing this. The difference is that the short focal ranges happen farther from the camera with a larger capture medium (35mm vs. 7mm in the canon prosumer stuff). With the GL1 you can get the DoF you're looking for, but you will have to let the DoF control your ability to position things in the frame. To get 6" of DoF with the GL1, you'll need to position the camera nearly touching the actors or a mile away. If you use the latter, you will crush the depth in your frame by zooming in which magnifies the background.

With the 35mm adaptor, the capture frome size allows you to be farther away frojm your subjects to get the same DoF which allows you to frame actors better rather than just their eyes or teeth. I am using a 50mm lens on my adaptor and am VERY happy with the results! Extremely different footage. The similarities you see in that footage disappear when you look at where the camera is positioned vs. where it would have been without the adaptor.

Hope that answers your questions about the differences in the DoF with/without the adaptor.

Ben and Cole, your information was just what I needed. Thanks.