Jump to content

What kind of camera/lens can you use to get such detailed close ups from far away


Recommended Posts

There are 20:1 zoom lenses on several mid-range (< $10K) video cameras. Mine is 18x and has an equivalent focal length of 30 to 527 mm, and you can apply digital "zoom" of 1.5x on top of that. The range in this video is on the order of 16:1, by rough estimate.

 

The videographer seems to have a thing for feet ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 200 mm macro lens has a working distance of 16" or less, and you would be halfway across the room to get the entire torso. The sample video was shot using a zoom lens from 4' or 5' away.

 

Video lenses typically can focus very close and have a good DOF due to the small sensor size. It's not hard to focus close enough to see shadows of the dust on the front element or filter. However that's not what was done here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could do that with my GX 8 and the Lumix 35-100mm. If I added my NIkon 5T two element to the lens I could get the close focus closer. Not a big problem as I have found it. If you check the close focus on a zoom you will find what frame it fills at closest point. Should be part of the specs. Lenses do such things routinely. Best lenses do them smoothly as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not macro, and not even close-up, since when zoomed out the young lady is obviously a few feet away (sic). It's a long telephoto.

 

There are dozens of compact digital cameras on the market with a huge zoom range and video capability. A zoom range from 24mm to 600mm (35mm equivalent) is pretty common these days.

 

Not sure that foot fetish videos should be encouraged on Pnet though. They're not even particularly pretty feet IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Questions: What are the desired result? - 1080p video? 4K video? Stills? - If so, which size? // Limitations? - Budged? - Has the camera to be stealthy? Is working in broad daylight OK or should it work indoors?

I'm not a video guy. - I think you need a 300mm equivalent lens and might be happier with 400mm equivalent. Read for an overview of bottom level compact cameras that might be suitable.

I think crucial specs to look for would be praise earning AF performance + optical image stabilization in the same camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most still camera telephotos don't focus close enough for 1:4 magnification (e.g., the closeup as shown). However if you use a tele-extender, the close focusing distance is unchanged but the magnification is greater. A less expensive approach is to use extension tubes, but the lens will not focus to infinity with the extension tube attached. So-called "closeup filters" allow you to approach the subject closer, but with lesser image quality compared to tele-extenders or extension tubes. A +2 diopter lens will focus at 1/2 meter with the main lens set to infinity, +1 at 1 meter, etc. Zoom lenses remain parfocal with a tele-extender, but not with extension tubes nor closeup lenses. If you change the zoom, you have to refocus.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Questions: What are the desired result? - 1080p video? 4K video? Stills? - If so, which size? // Limitations? - Budged? - Has the camera to be stealthy? Is working in broad daylight OK or should it work indoors?

I'm not a video guy. - I think you need a 300mm equivalent lens and might be happier with 400mm equivalent. Read for an overview of bottom level compact cameras that might be suitable.

I think crucial specs to look for would be praise earning AF performance + optical image stabilization in the same camera.

 

4k VIDEO. Limitations? Under 5K. Stealthy? No. Work in both.

 

I'm thinking Sony A7Sii and Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G

 

Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS Lens SEL70200G B&H Photo Video

 

Would that suffice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would that suffice?
Not really. I can frame one half of a sneaker in 1.2m (=minimum focusing) distance of my 70-200 at 200mm on full frame.

Clarifying: the Sony lens is probably "good". It also lets you move a tad closer; i.e. to 1m, but to re-shoot the video you linked, you'd fancy more working distance probably provided by Sony's 100-400mm and a way greater zoom range to do the wide shot mixed in. Or a 2nd camera with a wider lens... Also keep in mind that there will be no DOF at f4 on FF, (see my linked example_T5A2849.JPG.93909fea4e5a5997285694372d12bb74.JPG

& sorry about the bad light I used)

If you are settled for Sony, listen to Ed_Ingold who shoots video with that stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting.

What kind of aperture would be better than f4? 2.8? Would there will be DOF then?

 

It seems there is no sony equivalent for 16:1.

 

Earlier on it was mentioned that it could be a camera with a built in zoom like the Nikon Coolpix P900. But I don't know what kind of quality that camera would achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I set my f2.8 lens to f4. - With the Sony mirrorless series you have access to aperture setting for video. Only their SLT bodies shoot video (almost?) wide open all the time. With an A7 R II you get the best footage shooting at some crop factor using just an APS sized part of the sensor. For stills the R should provide better results after image (post) processing than the S untill ISO has to get really insanely high and quality drops to "good enough to illustrate a blog" level. Another R advantage: It seems to have significantly better AF than the S. - It might let you down when it overheats though.

 

Search for an DOF calculator online. (There are smartphone apps too) And maybe some kind of ruler / yardstick around your place.

 

Small sensor cameras: I thought I did sent you to dpreview.com in my first post. They should have "Real world sample galleries" for stuff they reviewed. I would look closely at cameras with a Microfourthirds sensor. These seem popular among Youtube contributors producing in 4K and are maybe as small as somewhat serious stills cameras' sensors should get. - Full disclosure: I haven't tried MFT. What I can say: The odds to get on a 4K screen quite satisfying stills out of a

Super 35mm (25x14mm) and "APC-C" (24x18mm) sensor behind a modern half decent lens seem pretty high. Looking at DxOmark scores of the worst MFT kit zooms, I am not sure if they punch in the same league. I am a stills shooter. Movie making is a miracle I haven't really understood. Looking at frame grabs from footage one seems to get away with very little quality. - Maybe there is an illusion of additional DOF? - I read some motion blur is desired for movies. - I do not know where camera shake and hand holding limits kick in but my basic understanding is: Movie making seems to require less light than stills.

 

The appeal of 35mm FF cameras to movie makers seems their ability to separate subjects from backgrounds in wide angle shots. - IDK if the same is desired for close ups. Getting two people in focus with an iPhone is a piece of cake with a FF camera it turns into a DOF & composition challenge, if you don't have light to stop down. Bottom line: a FF camera needs 2 stops superior low light performance to have a 1 stop advantage over APS. Or 3 stops for a stop over MFT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...