The HD 4:3 thread

[christopherwalters]

Any reccomendations for a mirrorless camera setup that won't break the bank. I'm torn between getting a camcorder setup and a mirrorless camera setup. Camcorder setup as the zoom rocker is way better for long lens. Mirrorless as the output and quality is really good(anything Chris Mulhern puts out).

Any help would be appreciated.

[CossRooper]

Any reccomendations for a mirrorless camera setup that won't break the bank. I'm torn between getting a camcorder setup and a mirrorless camera setup. Camcorder setup as the zoom rocker is way better for long lens. Mirrorless as the output and quality is really good(anything Chris Mulhern puts out).

Any help would be appreciated.

Based on what I have seen here, for cheap mirrorless setups, pretty much everyone is running a used GH5 and Meike 6.5mm fish. Mulhern uses an FS series body but that will break the bank if you factor in what lenses he's using.

But then if you look closer, almost everyone with a GH5 has a second camcorder for long lens, because zooming on a Mirrorless lens is such a pain in the ass.

So you're in the same pickle as the rest of us --

• get a camorder with a fisheye for an all in one, but deal with less than ideal cheap fisheyes like Opteka, not quite as good image quality, and relatively worse low light, or
• go Mirrorless GH5 and have your footage look great, but have your setup be multiple cameras, crazy eazyhandle rigs, multiple lenses on the sesh, etc.

Personally, I am an entry level filmer, so I copped a very simple Panasonic TM900 camcorder and opteka fisheye and external mic. It fits in a very small bag, is very light, and the whole setup was like $450. I can shoot long or fish with a single camera and a light lens, with about 1 minute of time to screw the fish on and off. The fisheye vig is a little dull, the rim of the fish is a little distorted, but all in all for making homie edits for youtube and learning how to film it has been great.

These cameras retain their value pretty well, so I wouldn't sweat your first purchase. Get something cheap you can see an example of on youtube and think "this looks good" and run with it for a year. You can always sell/upgrade as you go

I'm not sure if you've filmed before, but if you haven't, just know your first 5 edits are gonna be total trash (speaking from experience) so the cam doesn't matter that much. The important thing is to get out in the streets and start filming ASAP.

[christopherwalters]

Yeah I kinda figured that most people would use a GH5 with either a meike fisheye or Samyang equivalent.

There’s a not so recent new balance video of Tiago and towards the end Pekka Lovis filmed some of the clips and he uses a GH5 but the footage came out so good that made me want to go the mirrorless route.

I’ve filmed a couple of homie edits in the past, the most recent one was filmed on a vx2000 with a opteka 0.3 fisheye(link down below)

Me and my homie would’ve kept filming on the cam had it not fucked out completely. I still have the fisheye which is perfect for a camcorder, either ax100 or ax700 depending on how much I can get it for.

Thanks a lot for your help, I think for now I’ll get a camcorder for the zoom rocker and slowly build up a second mirrorless setup.

[OwlGreen]

Does anyone know if the glass is identical on all the Opteka 0.3x fisheye adapters with attachment threads from 52-72mm? If I want to shoot HD 4:3 on an HVX200, will a 72mm Opteka with several spacer rings produce the same image as the 52mm version with no spacers? Thanks.

[Jordan Wiens]

Does anyone know if the glass is identical on all the Opteka 0.3x fisheye adapters with attachment threads from 52-72mm? If I want to shoot HD 4:3 on an HVX200, will a 72mm Opteka with several spacer rings produce the same image as the 52mm version with no spacers? Thanks.

its all the same glass with different filter threads but i would go with the 72mm. you'll need an 82-72mm step down ring tho. you can see what it looks like here



hvx has a blurrier image and less wide because of the different lens the hpx has

[OwlGreen]

Expand Quote

Does anyone know if the glass is identical on all the Opteka 0.3x fisheye adapters with attachment threads from 52-72mm? If I want to shoot HD 4:3 on an HVX200, will a 72mm Opteka with several spacer rings produce the same image as the 52mm version with no spacers? Thanks.

[close]

its all the same glass with different filter threads but i would go with the 72mm. you'll need an 82-72mm step down ring tho. you can see what it looks like here




hvx has a blurrier image and less wide because of the different lens the hpx has

In the video you linked the person is using a 52mm Kapkur. I just was watching Ben Jones' video and he said something about using the 52mm version if you want to do 4:3 HD. Are you sure the glass is all the same? So on an HVX shooting 4:3 HD I'd have the same field of view, and same amount of vignetting with both the 52mm and 72mm Opteka 0.3x?

[Jordan Wiens]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Does anyone know if the glass is identical on all the Opteka 0.3x fisheye adapters with attachment threads from 52-72mm? If I want to shoot HD 4:3 on an HVX200, will a 72mm Opteka with several spacer rings produce the same image as the 52mm version with no spacers? Thanks.

[close]

its all the same glass with different filter threads but i would go with the 72mm. you'll need an 82-72mm step down ring tho. you can see what it looks like here




hvx has a blurrier image and less wide because of the different lens the hpx has

[close]

In the video you linked the person is using a 52mm Kapkur. I just was watching Ben Jones' video and he said something about using the 52mm version if you want to do 4:3 HD. Are you sure the glass is all the same? So on an HVX shooting 4:3 HD I'd have the same field of view, and same amount of vignetting with both the 52mm and 72mm Opteka 0.3x?

theyre all based on the century mk2, a clone of it. i would think having a bigger back opening would be better and less restrictive no?

[Thejumpoff]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Does anyone know if the glass is identical on all the Opteka 0.3x fisheye adapters with attachment threads from 52-72mm? If I want to shoot HD 4:3 on an HVX200, will a 72mm Opteka with several spacer rings produce the same image as the 52mm version with no spacers? Thanks.

[close]

its all the same glass with different filter threads but i would go with the 72mm. you'll need an 82-72mm step down ring tho. you can see what it looks like


hvx has a blurrier image and less wide because of the different lens the hpx has

[close]

In the video you linked the person is using a 52mm Kapkur. I just was watching Ben Jones' video and he said something about using the 52mm version if you want to do 4:3 HD. Are you sure the glass is all the same? So on an HVX shooting 4:3 HD I'd have the same field of view, and same amount of vignetting with both the 52mm and 72mm Opteka 0.3x?

[close]

theyre all based on the century mk2, a clone of it. i would think having a bigger back opening would be better and less restrictive no?

Saw these test clips of a 52mm on YouTube. I believe they all have the same size rear element so the only difference is the thread size. Hence a 52mm with two step down rings would look the same as a 72mm with one step down and one spacer ring. If you don’t already own a 52mm I would say get a 72mm cause if you want to film 16x9 you will only need one step up ring not two.

[nollieheelnoseslide]

Quentin Guthrie with the HPX x MK1 setup for NB Numeric

[Jordan Wiens]

so good. one of the best vx filmers so i knew it would translate. a bit too much vig for me but its prob hard to crop too much when you only have 720 to play with. hard af edit. 4:37 was insane

[CossRooper]

Quentin Guthrie with the HPX x MK1 setup for NB Numeric

So good! Hope he sticks with this setup.

To me it seemed like maybe it was a little blocky at times? Like the bitrate was too low or something. This is an HD camera, it shouldn't be so murky/muddy

[CossRooper]

6 years after making this thread i finally have something to show for my obsession with this format 

10 mins in nyc filmed with a panasonic hdc-tm900, opteka 37mm, sony ms-908c.  i started to figure out the settings about 6 months into filming with this so some clips, especially night stuff, are total dogshit



looking forward to filming more, gonna experiment with more in-camera sharpening, might try a opteka 58mm to get a little more glass/wideness, and also might cop one of those sennheiser mke200's and see how those sound.

[bataaard]

Expand Quote

Quentin Guthrie with the HPX x MK1 setup for NB Numeric

[close]

So good! Hope he sticks with this setup.

To me it seemed like maybe it was a little blocky at times? Like the bitrate was too low or something. This is an HD camera, it shouldn't be so murky/muddy

it's grain (high db) compressed by youtube.

[fickdiepolizei666]

filmed this over the last 2 years, mostly after work and on weekends.
GH4 + Canon 8-15mm + smallrig coldshoe handle (excusing my shity shaky filming)
just bought myself the eazy handle replica off of etsy, hope this will improve the shaky part.

Longlense is a HVX200

[fakiefs180]

filmed this over the last 2 years, mostly after work and on weekends.
GH4 + Canon 8-15mm + smallrig coldshoe handle (excusing my shity shaky filming)
just bought myself the eazy handle replica off of etsy, hope this will improve the shaky part.

Longlense is a HVX200

That was really sick. Filming was good and some heavy tricks in there. Fakie fs 360 down these stairs. Damn.

[natenola forever]

New edit ip put together 4:3 HD, actually all shot in 4k, and a bunch of VHS with a MK1 death lens, put a ton of slow mo just to bum everyone out

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RcfJ8bA3rqY" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[christopherwalters]

Does anyone know where I can get a decent working HPX170 besides eBay. I’m a little sketched out to buy one off there especially because I’ll be shipping it quite far. Any leads would be appreciated!

[Jordan Wiens]

Does anyone know where I can get a decent working HPX170 besides eBay. I’m a little sketched out to buy one off there especially because I’ll be shipping it quite far. Any leads would be appreciated!

https://www.adorama.com/us1663505.html adorama usually has some stuff kicking around. they have this hmc150 (hpx but films in a different codec to sd card). the only hpx they have rn is the PAL hpx171E (50fps). https://www.adorama.com/us1505647.html

[35mm]

New edit ip put together 4:3 HD, actually all shot in 4k, and a bunch of VHS with a MK1 death lens, put a ton of slow mo just to bum everyone out

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RcfJ8bA3rqY" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The fisheye looks very wide. Sadly you can see the camera grip on the edge of the frame.
I suppose you are either using the laowa 4mm, the meike 3.5mm or the 7artisans 4mm. Apparently the laowa shows more of the camera grip even though it is the less wide of the three, just because it is so small. I also depends on how big the camera grip is.
What camera are you using? GH5?

[Beltran]

My contribution to this thread.

[c-dock]

Just recently upgraded from VX/MK1 to HMC/MK1. Curious to see what you guys think

[Jordan Wiens]

Just recently upgraded from VX/MK1 to HMC/MK1. Curious to see what you guys think

the stretch u did is quite obvious. its easy to tell when you know the vig is supposed to be circular and not oval. if you need to do it for whatever reason just ease off a bit to where its not noticeable.

[fineslime]

Just recently upgraded from VX/MK1 to HMC/MK1. Curious to see what you guys think

The mk1 footy reminds me of DVX footage from back in the day and I've always loved that camera. Can you post a pic of your setup? I'd be interested to see it.

[c-dock]

Expand Quote

Just recently upgraded from VX/MK1 to HMC/MK1. Curious to see what you guys think

[close]

the stretch u did is quite obvious. its easy to tell when you know the vig is supposed to be circular and not oval. if you need to do it for whatever reason just ease off a bit to where its not noticeable.

Yeah I found out I fucked up and forgot to set the pixel aspect ratio on my render settings the same as my project settings. Came out in square not true 4:3 but I have that and better crop settings figured out for the future

Expand Quote

Just recently upgraded from VX/MK1 to HMC/MK1. Curious to see what you guys think

[close]

The mk1 footy reminds me of DVX footage from back in the day and I've always loved that camera. Can you post a pic of your setup? I'd be interested to see it.

[EdwardVsShark]

Canon Vixia HV30
CAMVATE Adjustable Camera Cage (1722 model)
Atomos Ninja 2 / Atomos Ninja Star (to bypass MiniDV tapes as well as apply 2:2 pulldown to record 1080p29.97 instead of 1080i60)
Recorded in ProRes 422 LT ~102mbps (compared to 25mbps for MiniDV tapes)

Nikon FC-E9 0.2x Fisheye
43mm to 46mm step-up ring

on-board microphone for now (camcorder doesn't provide power via the 3.5mm jack)

Stabilizer on for long lens shots
Stabilizer off for fisheye shots

1440x1080 timeline
fisheye shots zoomed in 10% and roughly centered

[35mm]

^Reading that was a trip. At first I was like: who still uses an HV30? (worst of both worlds, 16:9 into tapes). Then I continued reading and the whole tapeless setup description surprised me. Love reading the technical nerdery.

On another note, I was checking this clip filmed by Kevin Perez and realized the vignetting on the fisheye isn't a circle.



This is a superimposed circle over a screencapture. As you can see the vignetting of the fisheye is more of a ellipsis.



So I assume that the footage is filmed on a more square-ish aspect ratio and stretched to fit a 16:9 aspect ratio.

Apparently it is a 3:2 crop stretched to 16:9.



There is a gain in vertical width without looking to stretched. I think a 4:3 crop to 16:9 would definitely be to noticeable.

I have mixed feelings about it though. Things get distorted horizontally and it reminds me of the era when people filmed VX and stretched it to 16:9 ie Solo Jazz.

[CossRooper]

Canon Vixia HV30
CAMVATE Adjustable Camera Cage (1722 model)
Atomos Ninja 2 / Atomos Ninja Star (to bypass MiniDV tapes as well as apply 2:2 pulldown to record 1080p29.97 instead of 1080i60)
Recorded in ProRes 422 LT ~102mbps (compared to 25mbps for MiniDV tapes)

Nikon FC-E9 0.2x Fisheye
43mm to 46mm step-up ring

on-board microphone for now (camcorder doesn't provide power via the 3.5mm jack)

Stabilizer on for long lens shots
Stabilizer off for fisheye shots

1440x1080 timeline
fisheye shots zoomed in 10% and roughly centered

that's insane, props to you for putting together such a strange setup. in my ebay browsings i've always seen those "HDV" cameras that use tapes and film 1080i and I thought they were irredeemable but you made something out of it. never would have thought to go tapeless with those tape HD cameras

also putting the cage to the left of the camera to surround the flip out LCD is a stroke of cage design genius

i think I really want an FC-E9

dope post @35mm , seems like people are cropping and stretching all crazy lately, love to see some experimentation

[badding]

My latest 4:3 project filmed with GoPro MAX (fisheye) & Sony FDR-AX33 (long lens). GoPro records 1920x1440 4:3 60 fps and Sony 4K 16:9. Timeline is 1920x1440 and long lens clips are cropped to fit that. I'm used to VX era filming but i like how lightweight and easy this setup is.

[JoeyButterfingers]

Expand Quote

Canon Vixia HV30
CAMVATE Adjustable Camera Cage (1722 model)
Atomos Ninja 2 / Atomos Ninja Star (to bypass MiniDV tapes as well as apply 2:2 pulldown to record 1080p29.97 instead of 1080i60)
Recorded in ProRes 422 LT ~102mbps (compared to 25mbps for MiniDV tapes)

Nikon FC-E9 0.2x Fisheye
43mm to 46mm step-up ring

on-board microphone for now (camcorder doesn't provide power via the 3.5mm jack)

Stabilizer on for long lens shots
Stabilizer off for fisheye shots

1440x1080 timeline
fisheye shots zoomed in 10% and roughly centered

[close]

that's insane, props to you for putting together such a strange setup. in my ebay browsings i've always seen those "HDV" cameras that use tapes and film 1080i and I thought they were irredeemable but you made something out of it. never would have thought to go tapeless with those tape HD cameras

also putting the cage to the left of the camera to surround the flip out LCD is a stroke of cage design genius

i think I really want an FC-E9

dope post @35mm , seems like people are cropping and stretching all crazy lately, love to see some experimentation

I recently bought the FC-E9 and regardless of camera
It’s used on there’s a noticeable vignette shale that drives me wild 😤

[P2PIMP]

i just dropped a new video filmed in the pacific northwest with the meike fisheye/AF100 combo with the HVX for long lens. lemme know what y’all think!

i have another project that i’m filming in HD 4:3 that i’m working on in nyc right now and i’m geeked up to share it with y’all when it’s finished.