PDA

View Full Version : Canon 35mm 1.4L on BMPCC



Jovan
04-17-2015, 08:52 AM
Is anyone out there using a Canon 35mm 1.4L with the BMPCC. I bought a standard adapter but as far as I know the lens is stuck on 1.4 and I'm unable to change the aperture. Is there any workaround for this?

all the best, J

brianc1959
04-17-2015, 07:39 PM
Is anyone out there using a Canon 35mm 1.4L with the BMPCC. I bought a standard adapter but as far as I know the lens is stuck on 1.4 and I'm unable to change the aperture. Is there any workaround for this?

all the best, J

This is where "dumb" EF-m4/3 adapters fall flat on their face. You need a powered adapter that will allow EF lens control from the camera.

misterkofa
04-17-2015, 07:48 PM
Is anyone out there using a Canon 35mm 1.4L with the BMPCC. I bought a standard adapter but as far as I know the lens is stuck on 1.4 and I'm unable to change the aperture. Is there any workaround for this?

all the best, J

Use this.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1086797-REG/metabones_mb_spef_m43_bm2_canon_ef_lens_to.html

find more info here: http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-m43-BM1

also try searching. Been heavily discussed here. Also try searching vimeo for footage, etc.

Max Minoia
04-18-2015, 02:08 AM
Fast FF lenses are not the best choice for BMPCC, you can use this:
http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-BMPCC-BM1
Specifically designed for BMPCC, it has an optical element that reduces the camera crop factor from 2,88 to 1,67, keep in mind that you need to stop down the lens at least to f2.0 for acceptable results.

Or you can use this:
http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_EF-m43-BM1
It hasn't any optical inside, your 35mm will looks like a 100mm FF on your camera, but your lens will look 2,88 times more soft and with 2,88 times more chromatic and spherical aberrations vs the same lens on a FF camera.

Connor_R
04-18-2015, 11:28 AM
It hasn't any optical inside, your 35mm will looks like a 100mm FF on your camera, but your lens will look 2,88 times more soft and with 2,88 times more chromatic and spherical aberrations vs the same lens on a FF camera.

I don't think this is true. It uses less of the image circle of the lens, so you'd only be using the middle portion of the light, not the edges, and center is usually where the picture is best. I've never heard smaller sensors increasing chromatic aberration.

jpblack
04-18-2015, 11:55 AM
Let the wars -of misinformation- begin :)

Your 35mm 1.4 is still a 35mm, don't worry.

Now, on your actual problem, there are three-four ways..

1) Use a Canon camera to set the aperture. Problem is you're wasting time and carry a Canon body.

2) Set the aperture with a Canon body, and then use a Variable ND filter. Problem is you are now using a variable ND filter, and can't change the aperture :)

3) Get the metabones adapters. There is a metabones EF-m43 one, that allows electronic communication with the camera (IS, aperture). This is the cleanest solution, but it costs. There are also the speed boosters that others suggested, which are great, but again, you introduce other issues. Most of the users go for the speed boosters since they have a problem with the s16 sensor crop.

4) There was a clunky Redrock adapter that allowed you to use Canon EF lenses on m43 bodies, not sure if it is still for sale, but you can find them pretty cheap used.

Max Minoia
04-18-2015, 05:09 PM
Let the wars -of misinformation- begin :)
Unfortunately I'm talking about real experience, maybe in a little hyperbolic way, no misinformation here, believe me.

jimagine
04-18-2015, 07:56 PM
keep in mind that you need to stop down the lens at least to f2.0 for acceptable results.


It's way more than acceptable wide open.
This is the single best lens I've shot wide open (many agree) and I've got great primes in several flavors..
Not to slam you but you're telling someone that one of the single best aspects of this lens is unacceptable.
I shoot this lens from 30mm to 100mm consistently wide open - f/1 (Speedbooster). f/1.8 (Metabones dumb adapter) - and I never add sharpening and usually soften a bit.

Jovan
04-18-2015, 08:39 PM
Thanks for the replies guys. I found out that I can use the lens with my dumb adapter and change the aperture using my 5D. The trick is to set the aperture on the 5D then remove the lens while holding down the depth of field preview button. This method works well but the crop factor is killing me. I'm considering the metabones adapter but these cost almost what I paid for the lens.

Max Minoia
04-19-2015, 03:10 AM
You might consider to buy most appropriate lens for BMPCC that is way different than 5D, I'm trying to advise you because I wasted a lot of money in big fast FullFrame lens, the Sigma ART 50mm is one of the best primes on the planet, it looks bad wide open with the Speed Booster, totally desaturated, flat, magenta cast, horrible smeared bokeh, the cheap M43 Panasonic 20mm 1.7 will reveal you all the beauty of the BMPCC more than any fast, bulky, heavy FF lenses. Anyways if you want to jump on the Speed Booster train then the APS-C zooms are a better choice (Canon 17-55mm 2.8, Sigma 17-50mm 2.8, Sigma ART 18-35mm 1.8) but I understand that you also own a 5D. My 2c.

Jovan
04-19-2015, 04:24 AM
Thanks for your input Max, I understand where you're coming from. Every time I try the Canon 35 with adapter it seems like an uphill struggle, then I pop on the Panny 14mm and it seems like plain sailing in comparison.

jpblack
04-19-2015, 05:45 AM
Unfortunately I'm talking about real experience, maybe in a little hyperbolic way, no misinformation here, believe me.

With a smaller sensor, lenses are not magnified as you claim, they're essentially windowed (the FOV changes).

Just search for "crop factor" & "field of view", you will find hundreds of pages on the subject, For example http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?13-Crop-Factor-Lens-Database&highlight=field+view+crop+factor

jimagine
04-19-2015, 12:22 PM
Forums: the place where opinion and facts often collide.

Here are a couple of simple facts based on the people designing and using lenses on BM cameras.

The BMPCC Metabones SpeedBosster combined with the Nikon mount Sigma 18-35mm create the fastest zoom on the planet.

The above combination combined with a SB and dumb adapter delivers an almost ideal film maker's range of 30mm - 100mm of remarkable quality glass, 9 blade rounded iris with great bokeh and very nice manual focus.

It's solid, and doesn't rotate or extend when changing focal length.

Now here's my opinion:

The Sigma is pretty much the perfect single lens for BMPCC.

If you want to shoot with primes, then the Sigma Art lenses are a ridiculous cost/benefit deal compared to anything else I've shot.

My experience and ownership prior to getting the Sigma glass has been Zeiss Super Speeds and the top of the line Nikon and Canon primes.

Max Minoia
04-19-2015, 03:13 PM
Yes, Sigma 18-35mm one of the best lenses for BMPCC, I don't use it so much because is so bulky, my ideal lens is the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 but is a matter of tastes.

@jpblack: thanks for changing your last post (you know...), I know very well what I'm saying, practically there's no difference between windowing and magnifying because the windowed image is a little portion of the full image but you have to watch it not like a small window in the middle of your screen but in full screen, right? So, you need to enlarge it, now, since a lens has a resolving power that is an absolute value expressed in line pair per millimeter, if you use a 24x36 sensor you can see 3 times more lines than a 8x12 sensor, because of the crop factor you need to reframe your subject moving far away from it, etc... You will loose your lens resolution, no doubt.
And so on, purple fringes of i.e. a couple of microns are negligible in a big frame but noticeable in a small one, and so on...

jpblack
04-19-2015, 04:10 PM
No worries Max, sometimes I write as I think, and when I re-read it I realise it's more aggressive than it should. Apologies.

Although I understand what you are saying, it still doesn't magnify the picture or flaws, it just resolves that portion of the image better while having a smaller field of view :) A high resolution 35mm lens, will still have the same high resolution (and other design characteristics/flaws) in the specific part we are examining (centre in this case).

To prove my point, if you use a FF VIstavision 4K sensor with a Zeiss Otus 55mm, and then you use it with a Pocket, all the magnification you are talking about is negated, since the first camera has 4 times the resolution and the second camera has a x3 crop while being HD. If you looked at the Pocket's 1080p frame, and then take the same frame from the first camera (4K, Vista) and crop the image in order to match the two frames, which one would resolve more and therefore be worse (softer) according to you?

Max Minoia
04-19-2015, 05:14 PM
If you crop the FF sensor to match the S16 sensor is not a FF sensor anymore, so, what's the point? You obtain the same bad resolution, of course, but you have cropped the FF image area of 1/9 that is like enlarging it of 900% that is bad for sure, in real life you will never shoot with a FF camera thinking of cropping it by 1/9 unless you are completely mad! In real life you will reframe your subject to match the 2 frames or change the FF lens with the FOV equivalent, roughly an Otus 150mm (that doesn't exsist, of course), in both cases the FF will look way sharper, even if downconverted in 1080p.

4saken
04-20-2015, 12:10 AM
I shoot my Sigma Art 35mm 1.4 lens wide open all the time with the bmpcc speedbooster. I borrowed the 50mm from a friend once and that also gave me great footage.
Max, it sounds like your speedbooster is having some weird issues. Maybe you need to reallign it. Because everything you are saying is going against what other people seem to experience with the adapter.

Max Minoia
04-20-2015, 01:50 AM
Read what Vic Harris said about that...

jimagine
04-20-2015, 01:32 PM
Read what Max?
I use FF glass all the time with the SpeedBooster and it looks spectacular with absolutely none of the issues you're talking about.

This is usually the time that someone realizes that it's not likely that they're right and everyone else is wrong.

If professional users keep telling you that FF glass looks great and they know what IQ is and they have a great deal of experience shooting with multiple formats and lenses...well it is what it is.

It's a good time to get your SB or your eyes checked<g>. (please note grin)

But seriously, either I got the magic SpeedBooster, or yours has issues.

Max Minoia
04-20-2015, 06:08 PM
The thing is becoming off topic but...
OK! I shoot a couple of frames:
This is the Sigma 50mm ART at 1.4 on APS-C sensor (BMPC), looks fairly good (very low light here).
13632
Now the same lens at 2.0 on BMPCC with SB, roughly color matched, deeper DOF because of 2.0
13633
Now wide open, same CC as before:
13634

As you can see the wide open shot is way magenta shifted, ok, you can (partially) fix it with CC but look at the wings, there is an horrible halo surrounding the edges, this is the bad smeared bokeh that I hate, you can't fix it, and the whole image looks soft and dreamy, now compare it with the first frame: the wings are creamily out of focus, no halo, the image looks sharp, OOF areas are pleasing.
Conclusions: I like the BMPCC-SB combo so much, but fast 1.4 primes will looks bad on it wide open, don't you think?

Max Minoia
04-22-2015, 03:56 AM
Bump!

ARTnVIDEO
04-22-2015, 08:32 AM
Just an FYI, I have a like new Sigma 18-35mm Art lens for Nikon for sale.

I also have a brand new ( never mounted ) Metabones Nikon to MFT adapter that I can provide a great deal on with lens. Has aperture control.

If anyone is interested?

jpblack
04-22-2015, 07:21 PM
Max, whatever problems you are seeing are from using the SB. The lens doesn't have these issues, the SB also messes up the bokeh. Everyone using them knows it (and either accepts it, or works around it). I had both RJ and metabones EF SB, and had to sell both and just get a couple zeiss super speeds in order to have some wide angles. I would still use the Metabones EF for everyday work, the trade offs are minor, and both my canon zooms (24-70 II/70-200 II) were looking great, as well as my Zeiss ZEs. If you pixel peep (or you're picky on the bokeh), the speed booster shouldn't be used with fast lenses wide open.

I addition, if you didn't understand the point I was trying to make in my previous post, I can't help much more. Imagine the cropped 4K image on a cinema screen (where you can actually notice resolution issues and lens flaws). Now take the pocket footage with a x3 crop and being Full HD. Whatever issues you will be experiencing in the second case is not "magnified" because of the extra resolution as you claim, since in the first example, even cropped, the image actually has more resolution. It's just that your field of view is restricted and therefore guided to a smaller part of the image (making issues in that part of the lens, more pronounced).

4saken
04-22-2015, 07:29 PM
I've never seen such a magenta shift in any of my footage shot with the speedbooster and it also does not look as soft as yours with the lens wide open at 1.4.

Max Minoia
04-23-2015, 01:34 AM
I've never seen such a magenta shift in any of my footage shot with the speedbooster and it also does not look as soft as yours with the lens wide open at 1.4.
I posted examples of it, could you kindly do the same?

Max Minoia
04-23-2015, 01:41 AM
I addition, if you didn't understand the point I was trying to make in my previous post, I can't help much more. Imagine the cropped 4K image on a cinema screen (where you can actually notice resolution issues and lens flaws). Now take the pocket footage with a x3 crop and being Full HD. Whatever issues you will be experiencing in the second case is not "magnified" because of the extra resolution as you claim, since in the first example, even cropped, the image actually has more resolution. It's just that your field of view is restricted and therefore guided to a smaller part of the image (making issues in that part of the lens, more pronounced).
Sorry but what you say is practically pointless, if you crop a full frame sensor to look like a s16 sensor (and you need a 6K sensor, not 4K, for the same resolution) it will performs exactly the same as the native s16 one, so, this prove nothing, a full frame lens is optimized for big sensors and performs worse on BMPCC, this is a fact.

jpblack
04-23-2015, 09:26 AM
Max you are confusing basic math, I give up :) Also, we weren't arguing on lens optimisation depending on the format, we were discussing the use of the term "magnified" when using ff lenses with smaller sensors, which is wrong.

p.s. 6K has approx. x9.4 more pixels than full HD, UHD (4K IN 16:9) is about x4 Full HD, BMPCC's crop is 2.88, do the math..

Max Minoia
04-23-2015, 11:02 AM
s16 sensor is 1/9th the area of full frame sensor, I give up too.

jpblack
04-23-2015, 11:26 AM
Ok, but before you do, at least read this in order to stop talking about "magnification" ;) https://luminous-landscape.com/dslr-magnification/

p.s. You're right on the 6K, my bad, but the point remains..

Max Minoia
04-23-2015, 12:36 PM
Nothing new for me, totally pointless about what I said: resolution and some other aberrations of full frame lenses looks worse in small sensor cameras, PERIOD!

jpblack
04-23-2015, 01:52 PM
Well, at least now we know you're trolling ;) So now they just look worse? I thought their flaws were "magnified"? With a Speedbooster or not? lol...

p.s. Max, the problem is that the article says the exact opposite from you, so it should be "news to you".

Max Minoia
04-23-2015, 04:27 PM
Very funny...and wrong. I posted examples and explained very well about resolution and lp/mm and crop factor to contribute at the discussion, but I think you don't care about that, you are only obsessed by the word "MAGNIFIED":).