Excellent! Look forward to seeing the results. Paul via phone
> On Jul 24, 2015, at 8:52 PM, frank theriault <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh the humanity! > > cheers, > > frank > >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Steve Cottrell <[email protected]> wrote: >> Some minor surgery the other day to the wonderful SMC 17/4 fisheye, >> converting it for use as a cine prime - more in a moment. >> >> Some may know that I had previously done the same with my A*85/1.4 last >> year: removed the detent balls and springs from the aperture ring to >> allow smooth and continuous aperture change while shooting video. It is >> very effective and the images from it onto the Canon C100 super-35 >> sensor are luscious beyond dreams. The super 35 sensor size is smaller >> than 'full-frame' (36X24mm) and only a tad larger than APS-C... >> >> see chart: >> >> <http://cvp.com/images/uploaded/sensor_table.gif> >> >> ...so fields of view are similar to Pentax DSLR territory, which means >> shooting wider angles are more of a challenge. For wide zoom work - for >> instance when filming groups of people at close quarters - needing wide >> shots and closer detail at will, I have been using the Canon EF17-40/4. >> The problem with that lens is that the aperture is controlled via a >> click-wheel on the camera body, and when performing a move (say) from >> bright to dark and needing to adjust aperture ('pull stop') dynamically >> during the shot, the aperture steps are visible - even when the camera >> is set at 1/3 increment control - and so not acceptable. >> >> To get round this I'll be sourcing a copy of the only decent wide zoom >> lens on the market with an aperture ring - the Nikkor AF-S 17-35/2.8 and >> then having it doctored, literally, by a company that specialises in >> transforming still lenses for cine use; >> >> <http://www.thelensdoctor.co.uk/page6.html> >> >> They'll remove the clicks from the aperture ring and dampen it to avoid >> inadvertent movement. The Nikkor is a bit more involved than the old MF >> Pentax lenses, so it's worth doing properly. Why? Because the cine >> alternatives are cost-prohibitive for my needs. That's further down the line. >> >> Meanwhile I remembered the 17/4 sitting in a drawer and thought it would >> be fun to convert it for cine use. An hour removing the aperture clicks >> and a bit of jiggery-pokery re-situating the return spring and fitting >> an EF mount (sourced from the few I had specially made about 15 years >> ago when i first modified some lenses to Canon use) and hey presto. >> Early tests with it are fantastic - love the barrel distortion this lens >> offers and the field of view works really well on the C100. Will come in >> very useful for in-your-face wide shots in music sequences etc. >> >> I'm working on some video I shot while sailing in the Baltic earlier in >> the summer where I used the 85/1.4 so when that's completed I'll post a >> link to view. Will hopefully get a chance to use the 17/4 in anger soon, >> watch this space. >> >> Hope all are well, am dipping in on the list sporadically and often. >> Very little stills photography going on at the moment sadly! >> >> -- >> >> >> Cheers, >> Cotty >> >> >> ___/\__ Broadcast, Corporate, >> || (O) | Web Video Production >> ---------- <www.seeingeye.tv> >> _____________________________ >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
