Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canon 35mm 1.4L on BMPCC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Canon 35mm 1.4L on BMPCC

    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

  • #2
    Originally posted by Jovan View Post
    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.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Jovan View Post
      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/produc...f_lens_to.html

      find more info here: http://www.metabones.com/products/de...B_SPEF-m43-BM1

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

      Comment


      • #4
        Fast FF lenses are not the best choice for BMPCC, you can use this:
        http://www.metabones.com/products/de...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.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Max Minoia View Post
          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.

          Comment


          • #6
            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.
            Last edited by jpblack; 04-18-2015, 09:04 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by jpblack View Post
              Let the wars -of misinformation- begin
              Unfortunately I'm talking about real experience, maybe in a little hyperbolic way, no misinformation here, believe me.
              Last edited by Max Minoia; 04-18-2015, 02:24 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Max Minoia View Post
                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.

                Comment


                • #9
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    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.
                    Last edited by Max Minoia; 04-19-2015, 12:37 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      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.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Max Minoia View Post
                        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.ph...ew+crop+factor
                        Last edited by jpblack; 04-19-2015, 09:37 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          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.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            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...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              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?
                              Last edited by jpblack; 04-19-2015, 01:23 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X