Jump to content

Parky

Members
  • Posts

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Parky

  1. Having had my PCC for a couple of weeks now I would say the first acc's to lay your hands on are 1) SanDisk Extreme Pro cards if you're going to shoot RAW 2) lots's of batteries, and probably most important if you shoot outside a lot is 3) plenty of ND filters
  2. Apologies, this is slightly off topic but I thought it might be useful to PCC owners/future owners I've found a cheap battery and God knows the PCC chews through them quickly. They're available on Ebay in The UK for £10 inc shipping and I get them from photogear2010. They are easily recognisable by the Lion paw print and they are 1300mAh compared to most after market batteries which are 1020mAh so they last longer. (Blackmagic supply the camera with an 840mAh battery) I have 8 of them and they are the only ones I use now. Most important of all is they seem well made. I bought a few different make when I bought a Nikon 1 and after a few charges they start to bow and distort Which means they get stuck in the camera! See the second image.
  3. Just a quicky on this. If it only focuses up close and not at the distances marked on the lens then the lens itself is mounted too far from the cameras sensor. Now that might be because the lens has been taken apart and not put back together properly and the lens elements aren't seated correctly or it could be as simple as it's not screwed on to the adapter far enough or maybe even that the adapter itself is too thick/ out of alignment and sitting the lens too far away. To test the adapter, find a lens that works on the same adapter and set the focus barrel to 1 foot or meter or whatever distance is easily measurable. Then put the camera at roughly that distance from an object and move the camera (not the focus ring) until the object is in focus. Now measure from the object to the back of the 1/4" hole on the top of the PCC (that's roughly the sensor plane) If the lens is sat too far forward then the measured distance will be less than the barrel mark. Hope that helps narrow down the problem
  4. I'm 90/95% certain it's a Wollensak 1/2" Cine Raptor designed back in the 1940's for standard 16mm film. And yes it's almost certainly a C mount lens. Despite it's 3" length the 1/2" refers to it's focal length (so appx 12.5mm in decimal currency...) whether that will cover the PCC sensor without vignetting I don't know. (On a PCC that would make it somewhere between a standard and a wide angle lens) It does have a focus ring, in your picture, it's the middle of the 3 knurled rings. "Feet from Film" means the focussing distance form the subject to the film plane. The film plane is marked on cameras by Ø but with the line horizontal (soz, don't have the right symbol on my iPad) Annoyingly the PCC doesn't have the sensor plane marked on the body. Hope that helps
  5. To be honest I like having a lens or two that aren't pin sharp across the frame. People pay thousands for Tilt/Shift lenses just to achieve a mild blur around the edges. I'm an editor by trade and I'm always being asked to add blur to shots in post. It's the same reason I don't reject a lens If there's a touch of vignetting in the corners. Most of the stuff I cut has a vignette added in the grade to push the eye toward the action. Frankly if I want that effect I've got lenses that can do it better and with 'character' at a fraction of the cost.
  6. Hi Richard, Is it the bevelled edge on the Brass that you mean? How did you do that, out of curiosity? A lathe or a file and grim determination? Looks good, how would you rate the results?
  7. One more for the pot... Taylor Hobson 0.7" f2.5 (17mm) Focused at Infinity and shot at f2.5 and then f5.6 - Red box is what the BMPCC will see. Focused at Infinity and shot at f2.5 and then f5.6 - Red box is what the BMPCC will see. Looks like it will cover the Pocket Cinema Camera sensor safely. Needs to be stopped down to realise it's potential.
  8. Hi Julian, I'll take #50. Drop me a PM and I'll sort the money through paypal P
  9. Oh sweet, what's the thread size on them? Just downloading the test file now, I'm looking at #82 from a cosmetic point of view Shipping to London UK?
  10. Shane, don't know if it's just me but the pix you put in the last post don't seem to load? I just get two small white boxes? As I say, could just be me...
  11. Taylor Hobson 1" f1.9 (25mm) I think this is another Serital but it's not marked so I can't be sure. It looks very similar to the Serital but it's slightly longer and is slightly bigger in diameter. Focused at infinity at f1.9 and then f5.6 Minimum focusing distance at f1.9 and f5.6 Again the Red box is the BM Pocket Cinema Camera crop I chose the same subject matter for all three lens' in order that people looking to get any of these can have some form of comparison. Although hardly a scientific one. I think I'll dig out my old Arri Schneiders and my Cooke tomorrow...
  12. Taylor Hobson Serital 1" f1.9 (25mm) Another old newsreel lens. Nabbed this one off ebay for £40 ($60) Bargain! Focused at infinity at f1.9 and then f5.6 the Red box is the BM Pocket Cinema Camera crop Minimum focusing distance at f1.9 and f5.6 I'm happy I got a bargain with this one. Not good wide open, but then most lens' aren't. Stop it down a bit and it gets really nice. Should cover the PCC sensor with ease. P.S. Don't judge these shots on their artistic merit, I just shoved the camera out the backdoor...
  13. Taylor Hobson Super Comat 1" f1.9 (25mm) It's an old newsreel lens I picked up when I bought a Filmo a few years ago. Mines not great and it's tiny, which makes it a pig to use, but it works (a minor miracle considering it's easily 60 years old) Focused at infinity at f1.9 and then f5.6 the Red box is the BM Pocket Cinema Camera crop Minimum focusing distance at f1.9 and f5.6 I'm using a red box rather than the canvas resize method because I find it easier to judge the falloff on these old lens'. My file naming has gone a bit pear shaped. Ignore the 'mm' after the f stop value in the picture titles
  14. I'll need to test this, which I can't at the moment. Sadly, being a 60 year old lens, I can't find any data that tells me what the minimum working distance is for the lens. If the lens is functioning properly when you loosen the lens and achieve focus at infinity, a fixed focus lens should have everything in focus from infinity right down to the minimum focusing distance. Could it be that you're trying to focus closer than the minimum focusing distance of the lens? Unscrewing the lens to focus on close objects is the basis of macro photography. The further from the image plane the lens gets, the closer to the front element the focus point becomes What sort of distances are you focusing at?
  15. I know this is a C mount compatability list but is anyone interested in other cine lens options? I've got some old Arri ST lenses and a nice new adapter from Metabones that I'll be trying in the next few days. Should I post results here or keep this one to C mount lenses?
  16. ok, here's a quick and dirty focus test of the B&H Angenieux RF 10mm f1.8 using a Metabones C-M43 adapter. The first shot is as you'd expect to use the adapter, with the lens on fairly tight. Not going to win any awards with this one... Next, I unscrewed the lens a bit. Getting better... Next, I stopped down to f5.6 with the lens still loose. Now we're getting somewhere... Last, f8 still loose Best of all I think. Even with a bit of vignetting at the corners, I like this lens. I prefer 2.35 anyway... As I say, quick and dirty test. I'll try to get something more photogenic during the week. Right, I'm off to make some shims...
  17. My Metabones C-M43 adapter arrived today but I've only had 20 minutes to try it out. What I did discover with my Angenieux 10mm is that if I tighten the lens into place I can't achieve good focus. However, if I unscrew the lens on the adapter, about 1/6th of a turn, it pops into focus nicely. Basically I will have to add a shim between the lens and the C adapter. Not too difficult. Try it on yours, It may work. Be careful not to loosen it too much, as I said, I only undid mine about 30 degrees - very carefuly! Also, to get the best out of the 10mm you'll need to stop down to it's 'sweet spot' which will be around f5.6 I'll upload pix when I get a chance. (Which means when I've figured out how...)
  18. I guess what I'm getting at is that for wide angle lens' adapter manufacturing quality does start to matter. With a small sensor wide lens' are very intolerant of back focus errors. The B&H Angenieux 10mm f1.8 is a fantastic lens. They cost a fortune when they were new. The lack of focus wide open in the test shot back in post #88 could well be down to incorrect flange depth. I put more faith in Pierre Angenieux than I do in a $10 C mount adapter! I don't have a C to M43 to test this but I do have a cheapo ebay C to Nikon 1 adapter for my J1. I'll put my Ang 10mm on my J1 and check it against a focus chart and see.
  19. Hi All, really useful thread. Just waiting on some C mount adapters to arrive and I will add my lenses results to the list. One thing I don't think has been fully addressed is the quality and accuracy of the adapters. In order to achieve correct flange depth they have to be accurate to at least 1/100th of a millimeter ( possibly even 1/1000th ) I've also noticed on my C to Nikon 1 adapter is off centre. Vignetting is always greater in the top corners rather than the bottom, suggesting the C mount hole is above centre. (Could also be that the sensor is mis aligned, but i'm more inclined to trust Nikon than the adapter) Given that most adapters are really cheap it may be worth us sharing info on the adapters we are using. It won't have much effect on sensor coverage but will have a big effect on ability to focus, barrel distance marks and overall focus issues. I have a couple cheapies on order from Ebay but they may well come from the same workshop in China so may be identical. We'll see... I also have the much more expensive Metabones adapter on it's way which seems to have a very wide base for the lens. Again we'll see... Julian, wouldn't you be better off modifying an adapter rather than your lens? Cheaper to replace an adapter than a lens?
×
×
  • Create New...