Jump to content
Ted Hinkle

Post your wide angle shots here

Recommended Posts

I've found it a challenge getting consistent good quality ultra wide angle to fisheye shots on super 8. It means we've got to have either a good quality wide angle adapter that stays in focus, or a Century C mount of 1.9mm, or a 2.5mm which seem next to impossible to find and then have it collimated for our camera. Duall in NYC rents a 1.9mm but if you rent you've got to have it collimated for your camera and if you don't live in NYC that also means extra days of rental time to have it shipped. Perhaps some feel the Century 3.5mm is wide enough but the only footage I've seen is from Tom Houston, a great guy who does great work, has posted his 3.5mm footage here. But for me that's just not wide enough. So to help myself and hopefully others to see what they might be getting into with adapters or Cmount lenses, etc. I thought for those of us who care we could post some ultra wide angle to fisheye footage if we've got any or post a link to footage you've seen. Also I'm very curious to see if anyone has footage from the Canon 1014 XL-s with a C-8 wide angle adapter. I'll post a few shots and or links to wide angle stuff I've found too and be sure to post what lens and camera was used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canon 1014 XL-S with C-8 wide angle adapter footage. From Randy Simon. Looks like there's a little bit of vignetting and it also looks like it might be stretched wide.

 

Beaulieu 4008 ZM II with c mount CCTV lens and wide angle adapter From myself. This footage shot with a few different lenses but specifically the shots at 00:22 to 00:26 and 2:32 to 2:38 I know were from this lens. I've had mixed results with this set-up some times it's in focus sometimes it's not. Pics of this lens setup and a couple stills from other footage can be seen here.

 

A beaulieu 5008 with "shnieder 6-70" and a "canon c-8 5mm wide angle gaffed on the front" From Mulesfilm. Too much vignetting for my taste.

 

Pro 8mm Classic Beaulieu 4008 ZM II with 3.5mm elgeet and 3.5mm Century. By SmartAss Productions, There was an article on this set up in Small Format March 2007 here. At the end of page 17. And the video they refer to is the 2006 Copa Tecate Music video which can be seen in SmartAss Production's screening room... sorry couldn't find the link but if you go to their website it's easy to find just look for 2006 copa tecate music video in there screening room. Footage looks good but not as wide as I'd like to get... it wouldn't be wider but maybe an HD transfer would give it a different look.

 

I'll try to post more when I get the chance. But what do you got?

Edited by Ted Hinkle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woops I missed the link to Tom's footage in my first post. So here it is:

 

By Tom Houston. BTW he was reccomended to me by Bernie Odoherty for Recelling original Beaulieu Batteries for the 4008 ZM II Tom's website is
Edited by Ted Hinkle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are frame grabs from an old VHS transfer of a Super-8 short I did, so rather soft, but it was a Sankyo XL with a wide-angle adaptor:

 

gift7.JPEG

 

gift9.JPEG

 

gift10.JPEG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks David! Nice frame grabs. Thanks for taking the time to share!

 

I wish that someone would post a frame or two from a Beaulieu 4008 ZMII with a Century 1.9mm lens, like the one that Duall rents... Would be nice to see if it's worth the rental. Has anyone tried this lens? Would there be vignetting?

Edited by Ted Hinkle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Glenn Brady
I wish that someone would post a frame or two from a Beaulieu 4008 ZMII with a Century 1.9mm lens, like the one that Duall rents... Would be nice to see if it's worth the rental. Has anyone tried this lens? Would there be vignetting?

 

I've got both the Century 1.9mm and 2.5mm fixed focus C-mount lenses. The 1.9mm covers the regular 16mm format and the 2.5mm covers only Super 8. On a Super 8 camera, contrary to expectations, the 2.5mm gives a wider field of view than the 1.9mm, but the 2.5mm is really better suited to regular 8mm because it vignettes on Super 8 (I've had one port of the turret of a Bolex H8 RX4 camera modified with a spacer to provide the normal C-mount flange focus distance). The Century 3.5mm Super 8 lens doesn't vignette on Super 8 (Century made a 3.5mm regular 16mm lens, too). The 1.9mm lens gives a nearly 180 degree field of view on regular 16mm (with no vignetting), more than the 2.5mm lens delivers on Super 8. Both the Century 1.9mm and 2.5mm lenses (and the 3.5mm regular 16mm lens) accept 4 1/2-inch filters using a retaining ring that's fastened to the rim of the lens with three setscrews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Glenn Brady

I've found Century Precision Optics specification sheets for the 1.9mm f/1.8 Ultra Wide Angle, 2.5mm f/1.8 Extreme Wide Angle, 3.5mm Super Wide Angle, and 3.5mm f/1.8 Extreme Wide Angle. The first and last are 16mm lenses and the middle two are Super 8 lenses.

 

The 1.9mm full frame fisheye for 16mm weighs ten ounces, resolves more than 200 l/mm, and has 40% distortion and a 180 degree diagonal angle of view. The 2.5mm Super 8 lens weighs 9.25 ounces, resolves 333 l/mm, and has less than 35% distortion and a 140 degree diagonal angle of view. The 3.5mm Super 8 lens weighs 6.25 ounces, resolves 260 l/mm, and has less than 20% distortion and a 100 degree diagonal angle of view. The 3.5mm lens for 16mm weighs 9 ounces, resolves more than 200 l/mm, and has less than 30% distortion and a 150 degree diagonal angle of view.

 

In the Century price list of 1 April 1981, the 2.5mm and 3.5mm Super 8 lenses were priced at $595.00 and $495.00 respectively. The 3.5mm lens for 16mm C-mount was $695.00. I recall seeing a price of $1,995.00 for the 1.9mm lens, but I've been unable to confirm that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found Century Precision Optics specification sheets for the 1.9mm f/1.8 Ultra Wide Angle, 2.5mm f/1.8 Extreme Wide Angle, 3.5mm Super Wide Angle, and 3.5mm f/1.8 Extreme Wide Angle. The first and last are 16mm lenses and the middle two are Super 8 lenses.

 

The 3.5mm Super 8 lens weighs 6.25 ounces, resolves 260 l/mm, and has less than 20% distortion and a 100 degree diagonal angle of view. The 3.5mm lens for 16mm weighs 9 ounces, resolves more than 200 l/mm, and has less than 30% distortion and a 150 degree diagonal angle of view.

 

 

So between the two 3.5mm lenses you mention, which one would be a wider angle of view on my beaulieu 4008 ZMII? You mention the 3.5mm f/1.8 Extreme Wide Angle being a 16mm lens, will it work for super 8... I suppose it wouldn't be as wide on super 8mm, right? How do you tell the difference in the lenses? is it just the name "super wide" for super 8mm vs. "extreme wide" for 16mm?

 

I noticed that the footage I posted of Tom Houston's 3.5mm extreme wide angle on the 4008 ZMII was not as wide as I was expecting it to be. Would it be wider on the "century 3.5mm super wide angle lens"?

 

Thanks... It's all about the details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Glenn Brady

So between the two 3.5mm lenses you mention, which one would be a wider angle of view on my beaulieu 4008 ZMII? You mention the 3.5mm f/1.8 Extreme Wide Angle being a 16mm lens, will it work for super 8... I suppose it wouldn't be as wide on super 8mm, right? How do you tell the difference in the lenses? is it just the name "super wide" for super 8mm vs. "extreme wide" for 16mm?

 

I noticed that the footage I posted of Tom Houston's 3.5mm extreme wide angle on the 4008 ZMII was not as wide as I was expecting it to be. Would it be wider on the "century 3.5mm super wide angle lens"?

 

Thanks... It's all about the details.

 

The 3.5mm lens for Super 8 will give a wider field of view on Super 8 than the 3.5mm lens for 16mm (if the 16mm lens gives 150 degrees in 16mm, it's going to give a lot less than the 100 degrees of the Super 8 lens on your Beaulieu 4008 ZM II). Both lenses were available in C-mount, so both can work on a C-mount camera. The lenses can be differentiated by name, but they're also physically quite different. The 3.5mm lens for Super 8 has a length of 4.4 inches and the 3.5mm lens for 16mm is half as long at 2.2 inches.

Edited by Glenn Brady

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3.5mm lens for Super 8 will give a wider field of view on Super 8 than the 3.5mm lens for 16mm (if the 16mm lens gives 150 degrees in 16mm, it's going to give a lot less than the 100 degrees of the Super 8 lens on your Beaulieu 4008 ZM II). Both lenses were available in C-mount, so both can work on a C-mount camera. The lenses can be differentiated by name, but they're also physically quite different. The 3.5mm lens for Super 8 has a length of 4.4 inches and the 3.5mm lens for 16mm is half as long at 2.2 inches.

 

Thanks Glenn. I really appreciate your advice, I actually found a super wide 3.5mm for super 8 and I'm expecting it soon, so I'll post some frames after I get a chance to play with it. I'm anxious to see what the framing looks like and how wide it is.

Edited by Ted Hinkle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found another video on vimeo from Wade to share some examples of wide angle footage. This one was apparently shot on a Nikon R10 with a UWL adapter. I thought I remember hearing people had a difficult time with this set-up but this footage doesn't look too bad. Would be nice to see it on a better transfer though.

 

 

and

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just received my Century 3.5mm super wide lens in the mail today. I'm pretty happy with it although I'd still like something even wider. I'm guessing the field of view is probably around 110 degrees. Will post stills once I get some footage back from transfer.

 

Another note of interest on the wide angle topic... I saw a Samigon Fisheye 180 degree Aux C-mount lens sell on ebay this last week for about $80... I was curious about this lens and was wondering if anyone knew anything about it? I haven't seen any samigon c-mount lenses before and was tempted to bid but couldn't justify after spending $$$ on my Century 3.5mm. Is this samigon lense any good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about thread necromancy, but another ultra wide-angle fanatic here (albeit one going for rectilinear rather than fish-eye), and especially with recent news about the new C-mount Super8 camera prototype, the information in this thread could gain increased significance again.

 

Ted, any news on the Century wide-angle stills you were intending to post? According to this authentic Century catalogue: http://www.apecity.com/manuals/pdf/century_wide_angle_lenses_brochure.pdf the difference between "EXTREME" and "SUPER" wide lenses doesn't seem to be that between 8 and 16mm, but rather that between 140-164° fish-eye and pretty much rectilinear 100-110°, and according to information I've found elsewhere on the web, the even rarer "ULTRA" lenses seem to be 180° fish-eyes.

 

Bob, specifically what adapter were you using on that beautiful b/w footage? Digging especially that low Dutch angle shot at the top here. And how exactly did you get Ringo Starr to star in your short? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob, specifically what adapter were you using on that beautiful b/w footage? Digging especially that low Dutch angle shot at the top here. And how exactly did you get Ringo Starr to star in your short? :D

 

Sorry, of course I meant David here, not Bob. Doh! :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you compare these "mm"? E.g. my Digicam says "24-384 mm". But that's only "equivalent to the 135 photo-format". In fact it's 4.3-68.8mm.

So when these 1.9mm are also only "equivalent to the 135 photo-format", this would equal to something between 11.4 and 12.35mm for Super8/Single8/DS8. Hence my Fujica ZC1000 (with EBC FUJINON SW 1.8 / 5.5mm) or my Nizo 4056 (7-56mm) or my Canon 310xl with UWL (approx. 5.5mm) would be much wider (and cheaper).

Edited by Joerg Polzfusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Focal length is always the same regardless of the format. Only field of view changes. The (consumer) digital camera way of marking the focal length "equivalent to the 135 photo format" is common to those pocket cameras but elsewhere focal lengths are really comparable. Thus 1.9mm is 1.9mm and 7-56mm is 7-56mm.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you compare these "mm"? E.g. my Digicam says "24-384 mm". But that's only "equivalent to the 135 photo-format". In fact it's 4.3-68.8mm.

So when these 1.9mm are also only "equivalent to the 135 photo-format", this would equal to something between 11.4 and 12.35mm for Super8/Single8/DS8. Hence my Fujica ZC1000 (with EBC FUJINON SW 1.8 / 5.5mm) or my Nizo 4056 (7-56mm) or my Canon 310xl with UWL (approx. 5.5mm) would be much wider (and cheaper).

 

Think of it like this:

 

600px-Crop_Factor.JPG

 

The smaller your format (blue rectangle), the more it crops from the sides of the image you woulda gotten with a larger format (red rectangle) at the same focal length. Which is why it's stupid to stick to focal length figures for 35mm in an age where most formats we have indeed have little to do with the dimensions of 35mm Full-Frame or 35mm Academy, even in consumer still photography. What would be much more intuitive would be giving a lense's field of vision for any given format size.

 

Percentage of image area of 35mm = Percentage of field of vision you'd have with 35mm (I think).

Edited by Benjamin Dietze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I know the formulas and reasons behind the problem. Hence my only question was whether all the C-mount lenses are listed with their real values or whether there are also C-mount lenses listed with "converted" values that are "equivalent to the 135 photo-format" or "equivalent to 16mm/9.5mm/Super16mm/Super35mm/65mm/IMAX/whatever".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there is the Century 3.5mm extreme wide stuffed into a PL Mount. He is asking alot of monies for this scuffed example. Note what appears to be separation of the front element.

 

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/ARRI-Arriflex-CENTURY-Extreme-Wide-3-5mm-f-1-8-EPIC-RED-C300-C500-F5-ALEXA-/370835478160?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item5657845690&_uhb=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If your interested in zero curvlinear and minimal ultrawide distortion check out the UltraPan8 2.8 format that utilizes the full 16mm width of Regular 8 film in conjunction with 8mm pulldown. The 10.52mm x 3.75mm frame produces an ultrawide native aspect ratio of 2.8, i.e.


In this example I am used a Standard 16mm film format wide angle lens, i.e. Angenieux 5.9mm (Cameflex/Bolex Bayonet Mount/Adapter). Since the UP8 2.8 frame dimension is half the height of the standard 16mm frame I used the best part of the optics - the optical center.


To calculate the horizontal angle of view specific to the UP8 2.8 format:


UP8 2.8 (Regular 8) AR = 1:2.8, FRAME = 10.52mm x 3.75mm, AREA = 39.45 square mm


angle = 2 inverse tan( 0.5 w / F)

w - width of film (10.52mm)

F - focal length (5.9mm)


angle = 2 inverse tan( 0.5 * 10.52 / 5.9)

angle = 2 inverse tan( 5.26/5.9 )

angle = 2 inverse tan ( 0.8915)

angle = 2 * 42 degrees

angle = 84 degrees (rounded)


The larger UltraPan8 3.1 format utilizes Double Super 8 film. It is wider than Super 16mm and technically requires re-centering of the lens mount. In this example I utilized the Zeiss Tevidom APO Telecentric 10mm lens (C Mount). The lens mount was not re-centered and I shot range of f-stops (f/8-22), i.e.


UP8 3.1 (Double Super 8) AR = 1:3.1, FRAME = 13.00mm x 4.22mm; AREA = 54.86 square mm


angle = 2 inverse tan( 0.5 w / F)

w - width of film (13.00mm)

F - focal length (10mm)


angle = 2 inverse tan( 0.5 * 13 / 5.9)

angle = 2 inverse tan( 6.5/5.9 )

angle = 2 inverse tan ( 1.1017)

angle = 2 * 48 degrees

angle = 96 degrees (rounded)


All Bolex conversions and machined gates carried out by Jean-Louis Seguin (bolextech@gmail.com).

Edited by Nicholas Kovats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I know the formulas and reasons behind the problem. Hence my only question was whether all the C-mount lenses are listed with their real values or whether there are also C-mount lenses listed with "converted" values that are "equivalent to the 135 photo-format" or "equivalent to 16mm/9.5mm/Super16mm/Super35mm/65mm/IMAX/whatever".

 

That's a really sore issue. You can only be sure if they exactly state what format the focal length and field of vision figures relate to.

 

 

 

If your interested in zero curvlinear and minimal ultrawide distortion check out the UltraPan8 2.8 format that utilizes the full 16mm width of Regular 8 film in conjunction with 8mm pulldown. The 10.52mm x 3.75mm frame produces an ultrawide native aspect ratio of 2.8, i.e.

 

 

As far as I can tell, UltraPan8 is Max8 with an anamorphic lens, right? The problem here is that anamorphic lenses are in a way higher price range as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Visual Products



    Rig Wheels Passport



    Metropolis Post



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    FJS International



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Wooden Camera



    Just Cinema Gear



    Serious Gear



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    CineLab



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Glidecam



    Abel Cine



    Ritter Battery



    Tai Audio



    G-Force Grips



    Paralinx LLC


×
×
  • Create New...