Newbie with Minolta manual focus lenses

J

jeremylangford

I'm a complete newb to anything video. However, I have spent many years shooting film photos with various old 35mm cameras. The main camera I use is a Minolta X-570 and I have several old Minolta lenses that I use with it, including a 16mm f/2.8 fisheye and a 28mm f/2.8. I love the shallow DOF that these lenses can provide and I don't really see myself getting into video unless I can get the same 35mm DOF and POV that I'm used to.

So, I'm wondering what options, if any, are available for me to shoot video with these same Minolta MD/MC lenses? I used to think that my only option was a 35mm DOF converter, but now I'm wondering if a full-frame DSLR is a better option. I'm not sure what the cheapest full-frame DSLR is but I seriously doubt I can afford it. Because I have little money to spend, I was wondering if I could possibly buy or make a 35mm vibrating DOF converter and then somehow fix it onto a cheaper digital camera with a video mode such as a Canon powershot. I am absolutely not scared of vignetting, in fact I love it and use it all the time when taking film photos with my Olympus XA.

Thanks
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Your right, 35mm DOF adapters are dead end now with DSLR (unless you have a great camcorder like an XHA1 or something and want to leverage some more use out of it)

I run MD mount lenses on my Panasonic GH2 and it rocks. Simple $25 adapter. Full frame DSLR not required.

Let me know if you want to sell\trade that 16mm lens :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jeremylangford said:
I'm a complete newb to anything video. However, I have spent many years shooting film photos with various old 35mm cameras. The main camera I use is a Minolta X-570 and I have several old Minolta lenses that I use with it, including a 16mm f/2.8 fisheye and a 28mm f/2.8. I love the shallow DOF that these lenses can provide and I don't really see myself getting into video unless I can get the same 35mm DOF and POV that I'm used to.

So, I'm wondering what options, if any, are available for me to shoot video with these same Minolta MD/MC lenses? I used to think that my only option was a 35mm DOF converter, but now I'm wondering if a full-frame DSLR is a better option. I'm not sure what the cheapest full-frame DSLR is but I seriously doubt I can afford it. Because I have little money to spend, I was wondering if I could possibly buy or make a 35mm vibrating DOF converter and then somehow fix it onto a cheaper digital camera with a video mode such as a Canon powershot. I am absolutely not scared of vignetting, in fact I love it and use it all the time when taking film photos with my Olympus XA.

Thanks
Click to expand...

In my opinion 35mm adapters aren't worth messing with. You lose a lot of light, and you end up with grain, dust and other image imperfections. We live in a DSLR world now.

If you absolutely demand full frame, your only real choice is the Canon 5DmII. You can pick one up new for around $2,000, cheaper if you find one used. That being said, crop sensor DSLRs are still a good choice, and a great value. While you'll have to accustom yourself to a different POV, you can still achieve some great shallow DOF, though not as intense as on a full frame. The Canon T3i can be picked up for around $600 new, cheaper used. The Panasonic GH2, my camera of choice, goes for around $900 new.

EDIT: And Wheat beat me to a response.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Sucramdoow said:
When I researched this I found that it's cheaper to either buy or build a 35mm adapter and put it on a fairly decent miniDV cam. The only downside to having a 35mm adapter is you need to support the lens. That also brings the cost up. Here's a site that provides alot more information:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?98071-35mm-Adapters-Construction-Function-Pros-Cons
Click to expand...

First off, linking to other forums is against the rules. Secondly, that post is over four years old, before video DSLRs were even on the market. 35mm have a lot of cons, and aren't worth the cost and hassle with the wide availability of DSLRs on the market.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I just really don't want to lose full frame and I really can't afford a $2,000 DSLR. However, I expected these answers and I have always assumed that I wouldn't be able to do anything with video until after college unless I inherit some money.

But the other day I was thinking about how a lot of the film photos that I become satisfied with have huge amounts of vignetting because I sometimes shoot with crappy plastic 35mm film cameras and cross process the film. Even though the cameras are crappy, the fact that they're full-frame gives me the sharpness I need.

So I was thinking.....Why not get a good 35mm DOF adapter and then find a small, cheap digital camera to fit it to. This would allow the full-frame POV that I want and I would really love and benefit from the camera being small (Another reason I wish I could afford a DSLR). But what I'm scared of is that the dynamic range and/or resolution and/or sharpness will be so bad that I just give up because I'm used to the perfect dynamic range and/or sharpness of 35mm film. That being said, if the results can be expected to be reasonable, I'd be willing to use a 35mm DOF converter for the few years until I can afford a DSLR. I feel like I'm wasting my life when I never record anything.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
wheatgrinder said:
Your right, 35mm DOF adapters are dead end now with DSLR (unless you have a great camcorder like an XHA1 or something and want to leverage some more use out of it)

I run MD mount lenses on my Panasonic GH2 and it rocks. Simple $25 adapter. Full frame DSLR not required.

Let me know if you want to sell\trade that 16mm lens :)
Click to expand...

IMO, it would be a waste because using it on a Panasonic GH2 would lose the corners that make it a true full-frame fisheye. I love this lens so much and I have wanted to video through it ever since I got it.

wheatgrinder said:
So buy an $800 GH2 and a $25 adapter. Or a Cannon T2i for $500 ...

Worlds better then some cheap flip cam with a hacked 35mm dof adapter..
Click to expand...

These aren't full-frame are they? Full-frame is what I'm after because I don't want to cut the corners off of the true POV that these lenses can give.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You are putting far too much emphasis on full frame. In video you'll get just as much quality out of a crop frame, it just changes the point of view. It doesn't cut out quality, as you seem to imply.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SinEater said:
You are putting far too much emphasis on full frame. In video you'll get just as much quality out of a crop frame, it just changes the point of view. It doesn't cut out quality, as you seem to imply.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to imply that quality is way less important than POV for me. I'm used to using crappy 35mm film cameras and I'm happy with the vignetting effects and strong grain that are undesirable to many. However, I love my 28mm and 16mm Minolta lenses. These lenses provide the perfect POV and as soon as I use them with a crop factor, I'm wasting that POV by turning the fisheye into a wide angle and turning my 28mm into a 35mm.

And because I can't afford a full-frame DSLR, it seems to me that the only possible option I have that would keep the 35mm POV is to use a 35mm DOF converter. That way I can have the POV/DOF that these lenses were made for but I can hopefully record with a non-full-frame digital camera.

I'm not trying to sound like a stickler, I'm just wondering what options I have that could keep the 35mm POV. If there are none that I can afford, I will consider a crop factor.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0 Downvote
If you really want to lose light and image quality by using a 35mm adapter then feel free to do that. Just realize you'll be sinking time and money into a technology that is far inferior to what it currently available.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SinEater said:
If you really want to lose light and image quality by using a 35mm adapter then feel free to do that. Just realize you'll be sinking time and money into a technology that is far inferior to what it currently available.
Click to expand...

I obviously don't want to lose light and image quality. But I also really, really don't want to lose POV. If I get a 35mm DOF adapter I'll probably be dissatisfied with the end quality as you suggest, so I might wait to get into video for a few years, something I'm afraid I'll regret in the future.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I don't really know what to say at this point. It seems you understand the pros and cons of both systems, so the ball is in your court at this time. I still want to stress that you can get absolutely stunning videos from a crop sensor camera. It might mean you need to readjust your preconceptions of POV but I fully believe it's worth it. But that's just my opinion.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I understand that we all have to arrive to our own conclusions along our own path.
I will not berate you for your desire to stick to what you think is important.

if you HAVE access to a camcorder, you can have some fun artistic stuff with you're lenses. Try building the DIY 35mm adapter that uses oiled parchment paper as the imaging screen. It looks cool, not very clear, but has a strange beauty that you might find attractive..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG3KSg8yE8g
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just to make sure I understand correctly, here are two fisheye pictures:

21560_219507316729_678286729_3083623_6525286_n.jpg


50895370pd4.jpg


Wouldn't a crop factor turn these pictures into this?:

84885161.jpg


79323528.jpg


I guess you guys don't see this difference as a big deal. Would you think that I could simply stand farther away from the subject when I have a crop factor to achieve the same POV but different DOF?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jeremylangford said:
Just to make sure I understand correctly, here are two fisheye pictures:

21560_219507316729_678286729_3083623_6525286_n.jpg


50895370pd4.jpg


Wouldn't a crop factor turn these pictures into this?:

84885161.jpg


79323528.jpg


I guess you guys don't see this difference as a big deal. Would you think that I could simply stand farther away from the subject when I have a crop factor to achieve the same POV but different DOF?
Click to expand...

Lenses are tools to get the images you want. The lenses you own would merely be used to get different images. You could always invest in other lenses if you so choose. You claim a full frame camera is out of your budget. Your choices are either get a crop sensor camera and explore your image choices, or don't buy a camera at all. It's your choice.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SinEater said:
Lenses are tools to get the images you want. The lenses you own would merely be used to get different images. You could always invest in other lenses if you so choose. You claim a full frame camera is out of your budget. Your choices are either get a crop sensor camera and explore your image choices, or don't buy a camera at all. It's your choice.
Click to expand...

I see a 35mm DOF converter as an outdated 3rd choice but you're right, I need to consider a crop factor. I'm used to always hating crop factors in photography but that's because I had an easy and cheaper alternative: Old, mechanical, fully manual film cameras.

POV seems important to me. I love my fisheye and it seems like a crop factor is just going to make it less of a fisheye and more of a wide angle.

If I wanted to achieve the same classic fisheye POV with a crop factor, I'd have to buy a whole new lens: something closer to a 8-10mm. And if I do that, I'm losing DOF and probably going to go from an f/2.8 to at least an f/3.5. So in this sense, a crop factor loses light just like a DOF converter would.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top