mini35 mount

Landon D. Parks · March 7, 2005

If one was to get the Mini35 for the XL2, what lense's would you suggest using? Canon EF Digital Still Lense, Nikon Lenses, or PL Mount 35mm Motion Picture lenses?

I cant seem to find any Nikon or Canon lenses with manual focus though, at least on the primes.

March 8, 2005

I cant seem to find any Nikon or Canon lenses with manual focus though, at least on the primes.

Nikon MF

The only dedicated manual focus Canon lenses I have seen are the older FD range, although they have a different fitting to the EF range so I don't know if you could fit them on to the camera.

The auto-focus lenses usually have a manual focus ring anyway, although I strongly dis-aprove of them. (The ones I have seen, you could only twist the focusing ring about and inch either way and it really wasn't smooth at all, cheap as hell)

Personally, I'd go Nikon anyway. I'm not sure how they compare optical quality wise to Canon, but for build quality Nikon kicks the s**t out of Canon. (Feel the difference between a Canon EOS 300v and a Nikon F75, and you'll know what I mean)

Nikon have been the professional?s choice for a long time now. And I'd go with them any day. (I'm honestly not sure how they would compare to the PL range; I suppose PL lenses are designed for motion picture so they might have image stabilisers in them or something)

Edited March 8, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Rik Andino · March 8, 2005

I'd go with the PL mount lenses.

They're the reason the Mini35 adapter was made.

But if you're really strapped for cash go with the Nikons.

There's no point in getting a Mini-35 adapter to put Canon EF lenses on it

You could just get an EF adapter for you XL2

(Although I'm well aware that the Mini35 maintains the 35mm angle of view

As opposed to the EF adapter which does not)

Anyways go with the PL-mount lenses if you can afford it.

Landon D. Parks · March 8, 2005

I understand the fact that the Canon makes an EF adapter for like $400.00, But it don't give me a more shallow DOF. The mini35 will cut back on DOF some. I HATE DV DOF.

Phil Rhodes · March 8, 2005

Hi,

> I HATE DV DOF.

Don't shout, especially when it's an uninformed opinion.

Phil

Landon D. Parks · March 8, 2005

Don't shout, especially when it's an uninformed opinion.

lol, k. I wont shout no more about my hate for DV depth of field... But it still is horrible (In my opinion).

Keith Mottram · March 8, 2005

Nikon MF

Personally, I'd go Nikon anyway. I'm not sure how they compare optical quality wise to Canon, but for build quality Nikon kicks the s**t out of Canon. (Feel the difference between a Canon EOS 300v and a Nikon F75, and you'll know what I mean)

Nikon have been the professional?s choice for a long time now. And I'd go with them any day.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Er this is based on what experience? I know very few photographers that would choose modern Nikon AF lenses over Canon. From a still photographer point of view Nikon make a lousy AF lens they are slower (to focus), the optics are frequently inferior and the build quality is generally worse. Nikon does not kick the poop out of Canon, Nikon is infact desperately trying to catch up with Canon's major advances in lens technology and digital cameras. Canon have not made non-AF lenses for years as there is no market for them.

You can only turn the focus ring an inch or so???? I suggest you actually go and shoot with the equipment before making daft opinions. Both the camera's you suggested are strictly amateur but I would say without hesitation that the Canon is superior in almost every way. You can also get very nice results from the EF adaptor, but ask yourself do you really need another set of lenses. What focal lengths does your film need that you are currently missing and remember that the PRO-35 reduces image quality.

Keith

Edited March 8, 2005 by keith mottram

Landon D. Parks · March 8, 2005

What focal lengths does your film need that you are currently missing

Well, The XL lenses have the focal length I need. But I have heard a lot about the zoom lense that comes with the camera, the 20x is it? And the manual is suppose to be poor in some way or another. I am just using the information I have picked up from this forum to make this judgement.

But on top of the fact that the lenses for the XL2 are not A+, its the fact that I like Primes over Zooms. I have done amature photography for a while now, and I have loved the performance of Primes over zooms.

As to the fact that Mini35 will reduce quality. IMO, you are either going to have to suffer from huge dof or a little decress in image quality. Personally, I'd take the much shallower depth of field and risk some quality. Plus the ability to use cine lenses like the Zeiss Ultra Primes and Super speeds would be great.

More or less, Im just wanting to get rid of the XL lenses, and at least use the canon Ef adapter to be able to use Canon Prime Lenses.

About Nikon being slower than Canon, thats probably true. But for some reason, Nikon seems to be a few hundred more for there lenses than canon. I was always though "You get what you pay for", but I dont know. I notice you are saying the Nikon AF lenses are slower, but are the Nikon MF primes slower than canon AF lenses?

PS) If you use the Canon AF primes, is there some how to turn the AF off and manually focus the thing with the focus ring?

Edited March 8, 2005 by Landon D. Parks

March 8, 2005

Er this is based on what experience?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1. 10 Months of selling the things in a camera shop

2. The opinion of every single pro photographer I have asked (Some said Olympus though, but not Canon)

3. Look at most of the professional photography books, i have several, funny, I can't see a single Canon in there. Only Nikon.

I don't know what photographers you have been asking, but believe me they are a minority. Even my colleagues who have been in the camera trade for 60 years now choose Nikon over Canon.

Olympus seem very highly recommended as well.

And not just amateur equipment either, pick up a Nikon D70 and a EOS 300D, and just feel the quality in the Nikon.

You can only turn the focus ring an inch or so???? I suggest you actually go and shoot with the equipment before making daft opinions.

I play with the things every day!

Edited March 8, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

March 8, 2005

I notice you are saying the Nikon AF lenses are slower, but are the Nikon MF primes slower than canon AF lenses?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When he says slower he means slower at focusing, Nikon MF is manual so it can't be judged. Anyway, next time I am working I will run a test and see how they compare when focusing. From using the Nikons, I have never noticed any slow focusing before. (But then again I wasn't looking out for that, but I will see next time I work)

PS) If you use the Canon AF primes, is there some how to turn the AF off and manually focus the thing with the focus ring?

Yes, but it's useless.

The reason why you pay more for Nikon equipment is because it's not built out of recycled milk bottles. (i.e. Nikon has a much higher build quality, just make a visit to a camera shop one day and ask to have a go at a Canon and a Nikon, and you will know what I mean)

Edited March 8, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Rachel Oliver · March 8, 2005

Hi;

I own a Canon XL2 and also a Bolex (S16 conversion) I have to say that from a practical point of view, adding all this stuff onto ths mini DV camera is going to cause you more trouble than it's worth. I started out thinking all the stock Canon lenses (20x, 3x and 16x manual) were probably crap but I have to say they work really really well with this camera, I love shallow DOF and a "Cinematic" look, but I've found that using the regular lenses that are actually designed for the camera, together with a bit of latteral thinking and time invested, renders me with some very pleasing and very "filmic" images and I diddn't have to spend a fortune on film primes just to end up compromising them onto mini dv.... The stock lenses are really very sharp indeed, i'd invest some quality time seeing what can be achieved with them.

Olly

Mark Sasahara · March 9, 2005

Using a 35mm still photo lens on the Mini35 will double the focal length, because the cine film frame is about half the size of a still photo 35mm frame. So a 20mm still lens becomes a 40mm on the Mini35, because you are extracting the center portion of the lens' angle of view.

Using PL Mount lenses or Panavision lenses allows you to take full advantage of cine lens' full angle of view, geared follow focus interface, easily read and moved focus and iris rings. Still photo lenses while a good inexpensive alternative, don't give you the same angle of view, ease of use, or functionality as cine lenses, they just weren't designed for film/video shooting.

You are probably best served renting the 400 Series "Oszi" Mini35 rig for the XL2 and renting a set of Zeiss Super Speed primes. These have a maximum aperture of T/1.3 and since you lose about two stops, you'll still have a fairly fast T/2.8 lens. The newer "Oszi" has the oscillating ground glass that has a somewhat random pattern rather than the old spinning ground glass, which would sometimes show up at around T/5.6, or 8, I forget.

Part of the "Film Look" is the shallow depth of field, which you would achieve with the Mini35. Another component is the contrast, dynamic range and the way film captures motion. 24P and Cine Gamma/Cine Look image processing brings video closer to looking like film. Film is film, video is video, they are both excellent tools and I think film will be around for quite sometime.

If you do buy a mini35, then rent the lenses. Super Speeds cost about $10K, per lens. Some folks like the Cooke S4's and those are T/2 and start around $15K per lens.

The canon 16x manual lens is an excellent lens, the 20x is also very good but they have two functions. If you are doing more cine style shooting the 16x is great. I use it almost exclusively, because I need to be able to hit a focus mark and know exactly what focal length I'm at. Even with run and gun, I prefer the 16x for almost everything.

I like to 20x for it's image stabilization, which is great if I have to hand hold it, especially at the tele end. The longer tele end is great for wild life or extreme tele compression effects. The downside is that the focus and zoom are electric and use brushes, so there are no actual mechanical linkages to the zoom and focus. I have a focus gear for the 20x so I can use it with my CineTech follow focus. It works to an extent.

The EOS adapter for the mini35 is strictly a way to affix the lens to the Mini35, you won't get any electric hook ups. The Canon EOS adapter allows full electric functions of the EOS still lenses because it is connecting directly to the XL2 body.

Both Canon and Nikon are great glass, I've shot with both. Canon Auto focus is faster than Nikon, but for our purposes, we need manual lenses. The Nikons are fine. Canon FD manual glass ceased manufacture quite some time ago, but Nikon still has manual lenses as current product.

Do your homework. Go on other forums like DVinfo and others, go to the ZGC and P+S Technik websites and read up.

Thomas Worth · March 9, 2005

If one was to get the Mini35 for the XL2, what lense's would you suggest using? Canon EF Digital Still Lense, Nikon Lenses, or PL Mount 35mm Motion Picture lenses?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You need PL mount lenses because they are geared for use with a follow focus device. If you're shooting at T1.3 with a mini35, you (or your AC) will be pulling focus all the time. True, it is possible to do with just the focus ring on an SLR lens, but it will be almost impossible to get repeatable results without some type of follow focus rig.

I don't know what photographers you have been asking, but believe me they are a minority. Even my colleagues who have been in the camera trade for 60 years now choose Nikon over Canon.

I'd say 90% of the photographers I've met here in Los Angeles are Canon users, or are in the process of converting. They all seem to be very excited about Canon's latest digital cameras. I can't blame them -- I still use the very first Canon digital SLR, the D30, and I absolutely love it.