AF100/micro Four Thirds: Birger electronic mount for Canon EOS lenses

[Barry_Green]

Hey, I've hinted, but now I can confirm: the forthcoming EOS adapter is from Birger, and it will have all the same functionality as their existing product for the Red.

They say it is "pretty close to the existing cinema product, but with a brand new remote control."

They're going to let me have access to an early one so I can put it in the book, but this is all I'm allowed to say for now.

So, basically, everyone who wants to use Canon lenses on the AF100 (or the GH1 or forthcoming GH2, even!) check out www.birger.com (http://www.birger.com) for what the Red mount does, and check in once in a while to see if they announce progress on the AF100/micro Four Thirds mount.

Thanks to Birger for listening to the users and creating this product. And thanks again to Birger for giving me permission to say something about it, because this has been a very frequently-asked-question!

[Taylor Rudd]

excellent news. My L lenses will have a functional home now

Thanks, Barry

[Vitaliy Kiselev]

Any chance to have interface on camera side?
As I can see that this guys are quite good.
If they are interested they can contact me to get full GH1 database (if they let me play with this thing :-) ).
Can help with m43 protocol reversing :-)

P.S. As I understand long discussions about same functions implemented in ML, only few lenses can be used in such a way (for wireless FF).
Problem is in the motor specifics and lens report specifics (some report only quite descreet data). But they know protocol better then others (except Canon, of course).

[Barry_Green]

I have pointed them to this thread so that they can keep track of what the users are saying. I appreciate you making an offer to share your understanding of m43 protocol, and if they contact you then great!

[Peter J. DeCrescenzo]

I have pointed them to this thread so that they can keep track of what the users are saying. I appreciate you making an offer to share your understanding of m43 protocol, and if they contact you then great!

And that, ladies & gentlemen, is Exhibit-A as to why Al Gore invented them Internets! :cheesy:

[Vitaliy Kiselev]

And that, ladies & gentlemen, is Exhibit-A as to why Al Gore invented them Internets! :cheesy:

Al Gore unfortunately is more related to PR, rather any "internets" or "warming".

Btw if you want to look at real Exibit-A look at Ally McBeal series, and specifically Over the Rainbow. They have amazing scene about Exibit-A.
It alone costs 10x of all tiny DOF marketing footage.

[Nektonic]

Very nice. Any idea on what it might cost? Very broad ballpark figure even?

[mcgeedigital]

So in for this.

[Barry_Green]

Very nice. Any idea on what it might cost? Very broad ballpark figure even?
No idea whatsoever. I mean, I imagine it'll cost about what the mount for the Red cost, but -- that's total speculation.

[xbourque]

According to this:
http://www.birger.com/pdf/cinema_order_form.pdf

Birger mount for Red One is 1295$ + 700$ if you want a remote follow focus.

On the other hand, an old 10D will run you 150$ on Craigslist and enable you to set the aperture on EF lenses... (but you'll still be stuck without IS once the lens is mounted with a cold adapter on the AF100) :-)

-X

[dcloud]

Hella pricey :(
ill stick with nikon g adapters for a while

[Vitaliy Kiselev]

May be they use Quad code processor to run low speed serial communication (it is so slow due to new Microsoft NET 5.0 :-) ) inside this mount, no? :-)

[Vitaliy Kiselev]

Hella pricey :(
ill stick with nikon g adapters for a while

I don't like mine. It is very difficult to remove lens from it.
Aperture adjustment is badly implemented. Plus adapter and lens turn slightly back and forth (wrong size holes :-) ). May be just bad luck with Chinese producers.

[dcloud]

Crap. Lets hope affordable quality adapters come out soon... I so badly want an af100 @_@

[SPZ]

Hey, I've hinted, but now I can confirm: the forthcoming EOS adapter is from Birger, and it will have all the same functionality as their existing product for the Red.

They say it is "pretty close to the existing cinema product, but with a brand new remote control."

They're going to let me have access to an early one so I can put it in the book, but this is all I'm allowed to say for now.

So, basically, everyone who wants to use Canon lenses on the AF100 (or the GH1 or forthcoming GH2, even!) check out www.birger.com (http://www.birger.com) for what the Red mount does, and check in once in a while to see if they announce progress on the AF100/micro Four Thirds mount.

Thanks to Birger for listening to the users and creating this product. And thanks again to Birger for giving me permission to say something about it, because this has been a very frequently-asked-question!

Thanks Barry, this news made my day! You know what I'm going to do right now? Get myself a gh1 -finally after holding my purchase- as a B cam for the 100.

[timbook2]

Crap. Lets hope affordable quality adapters come out soon... I so badly want an af100 @_@

I have several adapters for my GH1 and believe they will work on the AF 100 as well.

of course only in full manual mode.

If you want full iris and focus control you will have to pay for it. Seems Birger are doing it....

[hyphygreek]

A mount like this but without wireless control would probably be a lot cheaper. Just to work with in camera iris control, AF, and metadata.

[dcloud]

well it doesnt have to be electronic for me.. as long as it controls nikon's apperture, its gold :D

[Retrospective]

Well if it's the same price as the Red EOS adapter, no thanks. I am sure someone will come up with a more affordable one.

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

I have pointed them to this thread so that they can keep track of what the users are saying. I appreciate you making an offer to share your understanding of m43 protocol, and if they contact you then great!

Well if we have their attention...

If they can not only control the Canon lenses but also get a readout of aperture and focus distance from the lenses... could I request that they look into making a PL mount adapter for the AF100 that is compatible with /i technology PL lenses? i/ technology is simply a digital readout of what focal length lens, aperture, and focus distance the lens is currently at. There is no need for actual lens control, but simply getting the readout on the camera.

Just a wishlist item! :)

[David Saraceno]

That's too pricey for me as well.

I hope the marketplace responds.

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

That's too pricey for me as well.

I hope the marketplace responds.

I'd say that's what you get for buying lenses without iris rings! :cheesy:





Haha, I feel ya, but I'm not sure there is going to be an alternative.

[Rick Burnett]

I'd definitely have to agree on the price point, that's too steep for me after the camera and accessories, but maybe they can have a few different options. Given I think more AF100s will sell than the Red One (due to price alone) maybe it's possible they can mass produce some of the technology and get that price down a bit more.

Still exciting though.

[Retrospective]

I'd say that's what you get for buying lenses without iris rings! :cheesy:





Haha, I feel ya, but I'm not sure there is going to be an alternative.
Well if we had a choice, damn Canon!

[svecher]

Very interesting development! I'll reserve comments on pricing, because, well that's all speculation at this point.


It sounds like the EF to m43 adapter will have to do more than EF to PL one. If I understood Barry's comments correctly, it will enable pass-thru communication between the EF lens and mFT body. It seems that Red body doesn't "talk" much to the mount. Has anyone used it?

[xmephestox]

http://www.birger.com/

check out the video, the IMPERO alone makes this thing worth several times what they are asking for for the whole package. if their mount for af100 has all these same features, it would be pure redonkadonk.

[Barry_Green]

It isn't gonna be $2,000. It'll be a lot less than that.

They can't make everyone happy, obviously, and they're not in business to give stuff away for free. I mean, it sure isn't gonna be a $30 ebay adapter! But their mantra is "professional equipment at prosumer pricing" so ... while I don't know what they're going to price it at, I think they are well aware that it will need to be reasonably priced, in context with the camera itself, for it to appeal to the type of users who are attracted to the AF100. I also think they're quite aware that the market potential for the AF100 is much larger than the market potential for their Red adapter, given that Red's sold some 6,000 units of the One, and Panasonic's sold some twenty times that many HVX200s, and the AF100 is priced and aimed at the same crowd that ate up the HVX200.

[xmephestox]

it's also the fact that r1 had issues with a great deal of EF adapters cause of canon flange distance with their lenses, and it tends to void warranties. Birger went back and forth with warranty issues, some people with the mounts kept their warranty, people getting it modded now don't have it. Which decreased the popularity of using it for Red. Hopefully this mount won't affect warranty on the af100, I don't see it happening, but it DOES require tapping in to the electronics of the camera...

[Barry_Green]

Why would it involve "tapping into the electronics"? The M43 mount has 11 electrical contacts available, there for the taking... surely the mount will just read those pins, and "translate" the commands into EOS protocol and pass them through?

The Red was never designed for stills camera usage, so I can see why they may have had to do further modifications to get it to work, but surely an m43->EOS adapter will be a much simpler project?

[xmephestox]

Your theories hold a lot more ground than mine Barry, I have no clue on the specifics of the electronics. The only benchmark I can gauge this by is how the Birger works with RED. If true it would help with the price point too if it's "easier" to give that electronic control. And as you said, volume is where it's gonna determine price also.

[Barry_Green]

IINM the Red's PL mount only had communications for the Cooke metadata protocol, but the AF100 already has autofocus and iris and OIS commands built in, so all that work that Birger would have had to do for the Red, has already been done in the camera.

I don't know how it will work for sure, I haven't seen a prototype, but my wish is that it "just works" like as if it was an automatic m43 lens. That all the camera controls like iris and autofocus just "work" without needing any sort of additional controller or anything.

[GRENCH]

So, basically, everyone who wants to use Canon lenses on the AF100 (or the GH1 or forthcoming GH2, even!) check out www.birger.com (http://www.birger.com/) for what the Red mount does, and check in once in a while to see if they announce progress on the AF100/micro Four Thirds mount.

Very nice.

[dcloud]

Id be happy if they make a cheaper version to just control the iris. Nothing more.

[Rick Burnett]

Id be happy if they make a cheaper version to just control the iris. Nothing more.

For me I thought this originally, but I want to use remote manual focusing when the camera is up on my crane. :) Though if it were significantly cheaper I'd probably consider it.

As Barry has pointed out, given that this is more of a translation issue between two protocols and not having to add a whole new controller to control something that doesn't exist in camera already (in terms of control protocol) it should be a lot cheaper.

If anything, I really can see it being in the same ballpark as the Red mounts for the Epic personally. They are $500 for the Canon or Nikon and they translate as well. Of course, they could push a lot of the technology for the interface into the camera and be cheaper, but this to me seems like a reasonable ballpark.

[CraigM]

Any mounts like this for Nikon F or Zeiss F mount ZF.2 lenses that pass through data/modes?

[LoganMackay]

Barry, any idea if the controller will work with ef mount (non motor) lenses? I have some Tokina lenses that I would love to use, they of course do not have motors, but being able to adjust aperture would be awesome.

[Mike McNeese]

Here's my input:

I am not really interested in electronic controls. I mean, i might hit the auto iris on and off every once in a while, but that's it. However, I would NEED to have an aperture readout on the display/VF. Most important is image quality and build quality. Having used their RED adapter before (only on a Lensbaby), I'm sure they'll put out a tight fitting product.

But, if this costs more than a few hundred, I'll skip and just spend that money on M4/3 lenses.

[Barry_Green]

Barry, any idea if the controller will work with ef mount (non motor) lenses?
No idea whatsoever. If I hear anything I'll post it here. All I know is that it shouldn't be too too very long before they announce their intentions fully.

[LoganMackay]

Thanks Barry, this adapter will basically decide if I sell these or not. Hopefully not, love the color and bokeh on these. Very Zeiss like.

[jdv]

Good news indeed - thanks for the link Barry.

[plasmasmp]

This really is the best news yet. Think of all the new IS lenses now compatible with m4/3.

I'm assuming that IS will still work since it is delivering power to the lens

[Multi-Media]

Will be holding my breath (and holding out) for news of a Nikon compatible mount...

[xbourque]

Id be happy if they make a cheaper version to just control the iris. Nothing more.

Don't forget power for the IS system! (Probably the easiest to achieve...)

-X

[Nektonic]

I'd love to get that Birger mount and the focus/iris controller. Probably won't be able to get it right off the bat, but it is a nice piece of gear to look forward to in a year or so.

Until then I'll probably pick up some Nikons or Canon FD lenses and an affordable adapter.

So in the long run: AF100 + Birger Canon mount/focus controller + Ki Pro Mini = :2vrolijk_08::kali::Drogar-Happy(DBG)::engel017::thumbsup::costumed-smiley-047

[SteB]

I have been dreaming of some sort of electronic Canon EF to m4/3 adaptor for some time. However, whilst the Birger adaptor seems the business, it is a bit expensive and perhaps more than I or others need. I could get by with just iris/aperture control.

If I remember rightly someone made a Canon EF adaptor for one of the 35mm adaptors and I think it was featured in a review on Philip Bloom's site some time back. This EF adaptor was more reasonably priced. From memory it just had a dial and digital display to indicate the f-number. I would have thought that it would be relatively easy to adapt this type of adaptor to m4/3 as this design doesn't need any interface with the camera. I am sure the Birger type solution is the one for the working pro, but it would be nice to see cheaper solutions for those who are willing for a bit more of a compromise.

[xbourque]

If I remember rightly someone made a Canon EF adaptor for one of the 35mm adaptors

You might be thinking of RedRock's "LiveLens" mount:

http://www.redrockmicro.com/lensadapter/index.html

I could see RedRock entering the EOS->u43 adapter market. :-)

-X

http://www.redrockmicro.com/cartpics/livelens_lg.jpg

http://www.redrockmicro.com/cartpics/M2e_LiveLens_lg.jpg

[xbourque]

Apparently they sell it for 495$

http://store.redrockmicro.com/Catalog/LiveLens-active-lens-mount-for-Canon-EF-lenses

-X

[SteB]

Sorry for the late response xbourque, and many thanks for that. That's the one. I thought it was a Redrock adaptor but without search PBs site I couldn't be sure. Hopefully someone will come out with a simplified EF adaptor like this for m4/3. The Birger mount looks the business, but it is a bit pricey.

(http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/member.php?u=47160)

[Birger]

I have pointed them to this thread so that they can keep track of what the users are saying.

As Barry said, we won't be talking much, but we're listening... any requests?

[dcloud]

Keep the price reasonable and certainly ill buy one...
powering IS and controling Iris is the main basic concern. If other features make it pricier, then make a diff version of that.
Perhaps below $300 would be awesome

[groveChuck]

As Barry said, we won't be talking much, but we're listening... any requests?

Hi Birger- I'm looking for an adapter for Canon EOS lenses.
If it's doable in the RedRock range ($495), I would buy one and you would sell a boatload.
Will be eagerly awaiting word(s) from you.
Thanks!

[dmpsk8]

^Agreed. I think if the price goes much over 495, my interest drops off dramatically.

[Rick Burnett]

I'm assuming you've read through the posts already, but to reiterate, I'd like to be able to control the focus and Iris of my EOS lenses through the adapter. I plan on leaving the adapter on the camera and just changing the lens since I have only EOS lenses and have no plan in the short term for any m4/3 lens (although that 50mm F0.95 is intriguing).

I was also hoping the price point would be $300-$500 as well.

I know that a bunch of people where I live will be waiting to see how I fair with the AF100 as they have a bunch of Canon glass as well and are thinking of making the upgrade to the AF100.

And I really hope you are planning on releasing a model before the AF100 comes out. I've pre-ordered mine and would like to do the same with you if you end up putting a list together.

[Barry_Green]

As Barry said, we won't be talking much, but we're listening... any requests?
My request is that it not require any sort of extra controller; I'd like to see it use the camera's electronic signals and power so that when a lens is mounted onto it, it acts just like a native lens. So the camera's iris wheel, auto-iris, auto-focus, and on/off switch for optical image stabilization all just "work", without any need for an extra device like the controller for the Red mount or the controller on the Redrock.

[noirist]

My request is that it not require any sort of extra controller; I'd like to see it use the camera's electronic signals and power so that when a lens is mounted onto it, it acts just like a native lens. So the camera's iris wheel, auto-iris, auto-focus, and on/off switch for optical image stabilization all just "work", without any need for an extra device like the controller for the Red mount or the controller on the Redrock.
I agree with Barry, this is key.

Currently m43rds buyers have two choices: (a) small high-quality native m43rds lenses which have auto-focus, auto-iris, in-camera lens correction, and OIS but tend to be slow and (b) any other lens with an $100 adapter that only provices manual focus, manual iris, and no OIS. So for your product to succeed, it has to bring the best and fastest of the Canon glass to the m43rds format with at the very least fast silent auto-focus and auto-iris. Personally I would love to have a fast telephoto zoom like 70-200mm f2.8L with IS and since that lens is $2500 I certainly would be willing to pay over $500 to put it on my GH1.

[1dog Studios]

Another Birger thread, LOL. Well if you were ever over on the reduser forums you will understand my joke, hahahahaha.

I owned one for the Red. As we all know it is electronic, duh, yeah I know...., and you will always have more issues with electronic items then you would have with straight forward manual items. My advice is if you need to use a steady cam or a crane get it. If you like to see how it works and have the money, sure get it.
Otherwise I would go for the older lenses of quality that have a focus rotation greater then 270 degrees.
If your going to use a shallow depth of field of less than 1' you will for sure need a focus puller. In that case yes a remote follow focus will do the trick.

There is only one real world option the is wireless right now and that starts at $2500 CAD.

You can always rent an Arri or a Preston remote for $300/day. With the last two you will have flawless control over your lens, whichever lens it may be, full 360 degree rotation, no hesitation, no waiting, no monkeying.

[Rick Burnett]

One question I had, in terms of making an EOS lens work on a m4/3, how much space do you have to work with between the back of the lens and the sensor? It seemed to me from the images that the sensor on the m4/3 is closer to the mount, especially given the mirror assembly on something like the 7D/5D.

And I do know that thread! :)

If I recall correctly, wasn't there no electronic control on the red one for lenses anyways? At least here, it's a translation between two protocols. Not sure if they are digital or analog, which makes a difference, but it really shouldn't be that difficult to do.

(And yes, I am qualified to make a statement like this because I am an electrical engineer with 15 years microelectronics experience and about 15 years of programming experience!) :)

My problem in designing one would be the actual mechanical interface, so that part I am curious about.

Which brings up another question, are their documents that describe the pinout of the m4/3 electronics and the EOS electronics? Or is this all reverse engineered?

[1dog Studios]

I would say to you, hand on experience, beg, borrow or rent a GH1 for a day and just play around with it. There are plenty of posts on other sites showing the GH1, the same mount as the AF100, working with a wide variety of lenses. What your asking is can be answered elsewhere by doing the math. I'm going to give you some links that will talk about EOS mounting on the GH1 and that is all the the Birger is, an EOS mount with electronic attributes and a bluetooth arial. So go look and read and then come back and ask more questions, because I am sure you will have more. Nothing wrong with the curious mind but read your ass off first. Your asking questions that other people may have the answers too, yes, but only because they read.

Adapters: http://www.cameraquest.com/adapt_olyE1.htm

Oh, and this will keep you busy, go over to reduser and read the entire Birger thread.

It is all reverse engineered.

No one is going to say any more about the details probably because that would cut into Birger's business. Besides, you wouldn't want to go through what he has believe me. You will know what I am talking about if you read the reduser thread. It is not as easy as it sounds. What you are really stuck with is the Canon 'L' lenses. I don't know the in's and out's but I tried other lenses that sorta worked, (Tokina 11-16mm) and some that didn't work at all, (Sigma 50mm, 1.4).







One question I had, in terms of making an EOS lens work on a m4/3, how much space do you have to work with between the back of the lens and the sensor? It seemed to me from the images that the sensor on the m4/3 is closer to the mount, especially given the mirror assembly on something like the 7D/5D.

And I do know that thread! :)

If I recall correctly, wasn't there no electronic control on the red one for lenses anyways? At least here, it's a translation between two protocols. Not sure if they are digital or analog, which makes a difference, but it really shouldn't be that difficult to do.

(And yes, I am qualified to make a statement like this because I am an electrical engineer with 15 years microelectronics experience and about 15 years of programming experience!) :)

My problem in designing one would be the actual mechanical interface, so that part I am curious about.

Which brings up another question, are their documents that describe the pinout of the m4/3 electronics and the EOS electronics? Or is this all reverse engineered?

[BitMaestro]

My request is that it not require any sort of extra controller

While I agree that an extra controller should not be required, I think the option to add one (sold separately) would be nice. Although I'm not sure how secure the connection for the controller could be since it would probably have to be relatively small.

Just brainstorming here ... what about a two piece adapter: the first piece (nearest the camera) is just a pass-thru (in the case of no controller) or it doesn't have any pins/contacts so that it doesn't accept signals from the camera (signals come from the controller). And the second piece (nearest the lens) not only translates the electronic signals, but also adapts the physical lens mount. This would allow the user to mix and match different first pieces (with or without external controller) with different second pieces (for Canon, Nikon, etc.)

Mark

[Rick Burnett]

Honestly I am not asking Birger specifically, just a general question to others on this thread that may have actually come across some information. I did in fact try doing some searching, but didn't come out with much information.

The site you posted doesn't even have any EOS to m4/3 adapters so it hardly begins to answer ANY questions in terms of EOS.

At least this site has an example of one with some personal opinions about it:

http://www.pamudjiphotography.com/blog/2009/08/07/e-p1-with-canon-ef-to-micro-43-adaptor/

Which answers my question about the added depth of the converter, which means a bit more room for electronics as well.

It's not like Canon has some magical electronics that can't be worked with. Clearly testing on the part of the converter manufacturer would be buying a bunch of different lenses (or renting) and trying them all out. Really, even if you tried five from each major EOS lens maker you'd not be testing that many.

I honestly wasn't aware if the EF or m4/3 electronics interface was something the companies shared. Not all interfaces are totally proprietary. I've obtained many specifications for many interfaces from the manufactures before. Of course I find nothing from Canon and it seems others have reverse engineered the lens as well (looks like they use 68HC05 microcontroller which I actually have experience programming). And that it uses a serial data stream.

For those interested, here is a pinout of the EOS lens:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/330871/0/2810747

Which looks pretty straight-forward. Wonder if they run at the same voltages in the m4/3 mount? And in that thread someone has made a break-out cable for the lens. Nice! Now all you need is a logic analyzer.

I cannot find anything on the m4/3 pin-out or anyone doing work on them. I guess that is the big question, and will certainly dictate the price. Given I doubt they will use the same protocol, some sort of microcontroller will be required in between.

I'm of course going to give Birger the benefit of the doubt. I am sure they learned a lot during what they did for the Red One, and dealing with Red invalidating your warranty if you used one.

I don't want any sort of bluetooth connection, as others have stated, interfacing with the camera directly and using the camera controls is my desired path as well. If that is not the case in what they make, then I may have to embark on making my own.

[BitMaestro]

any other lens with an $100 adapter that only provices manual focus, manual iris, and no OIS.

There are mechanical adapters for EF mount lenses that are a lot cheaper than $100. (I bought mine for ~$30, if memory serves.)


70-200mm f2.8L with IS and since that lens is $2500 I certainly would be willing to pay over $500 to put it on my GH1.

The problem I have is that once the price exceeds $500 it starts to get into the area where it could be worthwhile to get a T2i instead of an adapter. Yes, the T2i has moire issues, but how often will moire be an issue in a shot where you also need to have auto control of a non-m4/3 lens?

Plus, buying the T2i means I have a-whole-nother ("B") camera - Mark

[1dog Studios]

grimepoch you are a smart guy, you know what would be really nice?

A remote system like the HocusFocus for a $1000. I would buy that in a second. I have no qualms about getting rid of my EOS glass. I bet you could design a system like that with one hand tied behind your back. Now that would sell like hot cakes.

[1dog Studios]

Never.
If you want the best picture out of the camera for doing video shooting you never want to use auto anything.



, but how often will moire be an issue in a shot where you also need to have auto control of a non-m4/3 lens?

Plus, buying the T2i means I have a-whole-nother ("B") camera - Mark

[Rick Burnett]

Auto, what's that? :P Yeah, I shoot all manual, but I realize that I shoot narrative and music videos, I can make no comment on documentaries, ENG, sports, etc. I don't understand the first thing about "NEED" there other than a cinema camera (like film) don't work so well :)

So I have been studying follow focus systems for a long time (which means a year!) :) I bought a D|Focus to play around with on my camera and used it for one paying gig. At the end of the day, I just don't like all that added mechanical structure around my camera. After the rods, the mounts, the rings, etc, my tiny DSLR became a monster! I jest of course, but I didn't enjoy swapping lenses, realigning the follow focus, and of course, some of Canon's lenses have THE WORST focus rings I have ever seen. The kit lens is HORRIBLE for trying to keep a ring on it (although I am intrigued by the snap rings from indiFocus). Granted, I am WELL aware there are much much higher quality system. That said, they are all the same size.

Then I started looking at the Impreza and I believe I saw the Hocus products, and some other servo motor based systems. Again, I have all this glass with electronics in it, I just felt like I was going down the wrong path.

Then I come across this project where a guy takes an arduino system (open source development platform) and designs a follow focus system that attached to the DSLR through the USB port and controls it all digitally. It's BRILLIANT. In addition, he is making it open source and selling kits. Given I can program the Arduino, and that they make a wireless system board that you can add on very easily, this could have been my answer in a short time on the Canon's.

My understanding about the AF100 is there is already wireless functionality. Also, I have read many a document and diagram about interfacing to at least other Panasonic professional cameras, so I feel wireless should not be too much a problem even if I had to build something to do it. (And the only thing I really want wireless for is when I am running on a stabilizer, and I have someone else pulling focus).

I'd probably employ the arduino for any project I did.

However, I am going to wait and see. I watched the Birger videos long ago for their red products and I was very impressed. They seem like smart people that have a HUGE amount of cash to be made from not only AF100 people, but GH1, GH2 or ANY m4/3 camera really. They've got the right motivation, the right experience, and Barry telling them what we want :) And, they read here what we'd like. I'd rather try and give them my opinions on need and not have to go through the process that they already went through! :)

[1dog Studios]

An adapter to just get the electronic function of the iris is the only thing you need. In my mind as a basic function of a video camera. We want to keep in mind that to achieve a film like feel we want to stay away from auto iris. Auto focus would be good though. Right now my EOS lenses are useless on a GH1. Sure I can get an adapter so that I can put it on and control the focus. But I want iris too. So unless a mechanically adept individual just ads another iris directly to an adapter foregoing the electronically controlled iris you will need an electronic version such as the Birger mount.

I guess we can divide the request in to two different camps: 1. want to use the camera for filmic purposes. 2. Want to use the camera for run n gun news gathering, sports, etc where auto everything is desired. But than you still need limits or your going to end up with a lot of nasty noise.

For me it is not important how I control the iris, just that I can control the iris. Focus, if the Birger has improved one great function is the ratio options. You could change the ratio from 1:1, which is useless on a lens like the 16-35L, or 2:1, now this is getting better and for some cases 4:1, now we can pull focus. The only drawback is with wireless there was the tiniest bit of lag which made quick minute on the go focus changes difficult.

So whatever the system is: no lag in manual focus changes through a wired or wireless controller.

And

use an appropriate sized lithium pany battery if the controller will be wireless, NO double A or triple A.


The Birger Mount always had a wireless or wired function.

That's going to take some extra hacking though to get the Pany to actually power the mount. That would be eloquent though.


Still seems like a lot of work when Birger could easily produce a HocusFocus like product for a better price and just toss the EOS lenses. That's what Ebay is for :beer:.




There are mechanical adapters for EF mount lenses that are a lot cheaper than $100. (I bought mine for ~$30, if memory serves.)



The problem I have is that once the price exceeds $500 it starts to get into the area where it could be worthwhile to get a T2i instead of an adapter. Yes, the T2i has moire issues, but how often will moire be an issue in a shot where you also need to have auto control of a non-m4/3 lens?

Plus, buying the T2i means I have a-whole-nother ("B") camera - Mark

[1dog Studios]

Well said grimpoch.

So what about the company that originally made the remote for the Birger mount, ViewFactor. They have not only made an awesome powered cage for the 7D and 5D that takes care of that pesky battery problem but they are also working on a USB controlled lens controller for the 7D and 5D, both wired and wireless.

To me this is all fanciful thinking. I played the waiting game before. My advice, don't plan on anything that isn't already being sold. Trust me, been there, done that.


So the question is, how long are people willing to wait for the Birger mount?



Auto, what's that? :P Yeah, I shoot all manual, but I realize that I shoot narrative and music videos, I can make no comment on documentaries, ENG, sports, etc. I don't understand the first thing about "NEED" there other than a cinema camera (like film) don't work so well :)

Given I can program the Arduino, and that they make a wireless system board that you can add on very easily, this could have been my answer in a short time on the Canon's.

My understanding about the AF100 is there is already wireless functionality. Also, I have read many a document and diagram about interfacing to at least other Panasonic professional cameras, so I feel wireless should not be too much a problem even if I had to build something to do it. (And the only thing I really want wireless for is when I am running on a stabilizer, and I have someone else pulling focus).

:)

[Barry_Green]

While I agree that an extra controller should not be required, I think the option to add one (sold separately) would be nice.
To what purpose though? If you make it work through the camera's controls, then you inherently have access to the camera's remote system as well. So you could get a Varizoom or Foxi or whatever, and be able to control the iris and focus remotely, without needing some additional/custom piece of hardware.

A translating adapter that just interprets the camcorder's protocol into lens protocol, seems to me to give the best of all possible worlds.

[Barry_Green]

So the question is, how long are people willing to wait for the Birger mount?
I'd be willing to wait at least another three months. Seeing as the AF100 doesn't come out for three months. :D

[Rick Burnett]

To what purpose though? If you make it work through the camera's controls, then you inherently have access to the camera's remote system as well. So you could get a Varizoom or Foxi or whatever, and be able to control the iris and focus remotely, without needing some additional/custom piece of hardware.

A translating adapter that just interprets the camcorder's protocol into lens protocol, seems to me to give the best of all possible worlds.

This is how I feel as well. It seems the cleanest path to a simpler system.

[1dog Studios]

@Barry and @gimepoch ---> I agree, that does sound like a clean system.

So let me get this correct, you would like, and have conveyed this to the powers that be, that an EOS lens will pretend to be a panasonic lens in order for the AF100 to think it is a panasonic lens and thereby have control over the focus and iris. Did I miss something?

With a new version of this: http://www.wonderhowto.com/how-to-install-and-set-up-birger-mount-for-red-one-278406/

[Rick Burnett]

That's correct :) (except for the part about the Red adapter, I don't want a new version of that adapter as it contains a bunch of stuff I don't want.)

[Barry_Green]

1dog, you do understand what I'm asking for. Whether that's what they'll produce or not, I don't know, but that's what I want. Birger has said they're working on an electronic mount. I hope that they're working on a "native" mount, and not just a conversion of their existing Red One-style mount.

Birger has experience making electronic controls for Canon lenses on the Red One, so they've clearly figured out how to do it and have a good head start on making the device I want. But the Birger Red One mount is not what we want for the AF100. At least, it's not what I want. The AF100 already has all the controls, I just want the new Birger mount to be a "translator" to translate the m43 protocol into EOS protocol, so the lens will act like a "native" lens as far as the camera is concerned.

And once that happens, then any lens controller such as the VariZoom, or the Foxi, should just automatically work with any and all Canon EOS lenses. And the camera's native functions such as auto-iris and auto-focus and OIS should all "just work".

[impressive creations]

1dog, you do understand what I'm asking for. Whether that's what they'll produce or not, I don't know, but that's what I want. Birger has said they're working on an electronic mount. I hope that they're working on a "native" mount, and not just a conversion of their existing Red One-style mount.

Birger has experience making electronic controls for Canon lenses on the Red One, so they've clearly figured out how to do it and have a good head start on making the device I want. But the Birger Red One mount is not what we want for the AF100. At least, it's not what I want. The AF100 already has all the controls, I just want the new Birger mount to be a "translator" to translate the m43 protocol into EOS protocol, so the lens will act like a "native" lens as far as the camera is concerned.

And once that happens, then any lens controller such as the VariZoom, or the Foxi, should just automatically work with any and all Canon EOS lenses. And the camera's native functions such as auto-iris and auto-focus and OIS should all "just work".

And yes! That's what I want as well! Thanks for making it clear Barry! I have a bunch of L Lenses and this new 100L Macro that is insane and the IS on it is amazing! You can go handheld with the thing all day and it's pretty dang smooth. All I want to be able to do it control my Iris and have the IS work. Heck, I don't even need meta-data or any of that stuff. I always use manual focus with my 7D. (love hate relationship). I have an HMC and I even use manual on that as well. And we use both 7D and HMC's 100% for weddings. So yeah, I second Barry's comment!

[1dog Studios]

Barry, I know the score when it comes to Birger. So if this idea becomes reality it will be cool.

[Exact]

Now, this has made me think the AF-100 may be useful after all. I was really concerned about glass availability!

[Barry_Green]

You shouldn't be; pretty much any lens ever made for any camera, can be adapted to the AF100. There's already adapters for Nikon, Canon, Leica, Olympus, Minolta, Pentax K, M42/screwmount, PL-mount, c-mount, B4 mount, even Aaton mount and BNCR and I think I saw an OCT-19 adapter. And the camera's not even out yet!

The promise of the Birger adapter is for electronic control of electronic lenses that don't have manual controls (such as the newer Canon lenses that don't have iris rings). But there are adapters for pretty much every cinema and still camera mount.

[Steve Kahn]

Are we really still three long months away?

I just bought this adapter (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220650556616&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT#ht_3608wt_1032) for my FD glass... $26.90 - manual all the way.

Looking forward to seeing the cam tomorrow at DV-expo

[1dog Studios]

Are we really still three long months away?

I just bought this adapter (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220650556616&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT#ht_3608wt_1032) for my FD glass... $26.90 - manual all the way.

Looking forward to seeing the cam tomorrow at DV-expo


Now I'm jealous. Getting to see the camera up close.

1 cool thing though, is that you could never mount, with warranty, an FD lens on a Red1.

[Rick Burnett]

A couple of my lens (Sigma primes) are also available as 4/3 mount. I guess I have the option of picking them up and using them instead if it is not ready in time.

[BitMaestro]

If you make it work through the camera's controls, then you inherently have access to the camera's remote system as well. So you could get a Varizoom or Foxi or whatever, and be able to control the iris and focus remotely, without needing some additional/custom piece of hardware.

Would that also be true for the GH2? If so, then sorry, my bad.

Mark

[majikfraug]

1dog, you do understand what I'm asking for. Whether that's what they'll produce or not, I don't know, but that's what I want. Birger has said they're working on an electronic mount. I hope that they're working on a "native" mount, and not just a conversion of their existing Red One-style mount.

Birger has experience making electronic controls for Canon lenses on the Red One, so they've clearly figured out how to do it and have a good head start on making the device I want. But the Birger Red One mount is not what we want for the AF100. At least, it's not what I want. The AF100 already has all the controls, I just want the new Birger mount to be a "translator" to translate the m43 protocol into EOS protocol, so the lens will act like a "native" lens as far as the camera is concerned.

And once that happens, then any lens controller such as the VariZoom, or the Foxi, should just automatically work with any and all Canon EOS lenses. And the camera's native functions such as auto-iris and auto-focus and OIS should all "just work".

I second that :thumbsup:

[thekreative]

Didn't Jan state that there wouldn't be a focus input port?

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=224023

[hunter richards]

Yes she did, wish it did support a focus input like most of the other panasonic cameras.

[Rick Burnett]

oh....hmmmm, that sounds like a problem then. I need remote focus capability.

[Barry_Green]

Jan would know better than I would, but I'd ask her to double-check on that, because I'm pretty sure the only protocol missing from the AF100 was remote zoom. I'm 85% sure that on the prototype I used, it was clearly labeled for remote iris, focus, and start/stop. Then again, that's a prototype, and until it's finally released I guess we won't know for sure.

Anybody in Los Angeles with a Varizoom or Foxi who can run it over to the prototype at DV Expo and give it a try?

[Rick Burnett]

I can only imagine just some miscommunication. I'd ALWAYS take focus control over iris control if I had to pick between the two.

[Rick Burnett]

Sadly, at least as far as the prototype is concerned, Jan seems to be right:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_xYMkl-Jw6Fc/TIkLUJrqFZI/AAAAAAAAA1M/2dfcgV6FZIo/s1600/panasonicaf101_2547bl.jpg

:(

Maybe a firmware change can at least allow us to select what we control out of those ports.

Here is an image of those same ports on an DVX100b that include zoom and focus

http://dvxuser.com/articles/100b/

[Rick Burnett]

Actually, I read the press release and they even mention zoom, however, I just went and checked out the specifications on the Panasonic website:

http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/af100/feature04.html

And here they list all but zoom:

Camera Remote (super mini jack x 1, S/S, mini jack x 1; focus, iris).

[Barry_Green]

That makes more sense to me. The camera has electronic capability to control a lens's focus and iris, but obviously not zoom (because there's no zoom rocker on the body, nor is there any servo motor in the lenses to drive zoom).

So I do expect that it will have start/stop, focus, and iris control. That picture you posted earlier is disturbing; I hope that was a misprint on the body and that the website's list of features is more correct.

[Rick Burnett]

Maybe they just forgot to switch to a smaller font :)

[Multi-Media]

That makes more sense to me. The camera has electronic capability to control a lens's focus and iris, but obviously not zoom (because there's no zoom rocker on the body, nor is there any servo motor in the lenses to drive zoom).

So I do expect that it will have start/stop, focus, and iris control. That picture you posted earlier is disturbing; I hope that was a misprint on the body and that the website's list of features is more correct.

EXACTLY! Auto Iris most of the time looks like a mistake and gets edited out... It makes sense that there could be a simple TRANSLATOR for the focus and iris control... never expected a zoom control anyway...

[Barry_Green]

Update from Birger. They're listening, and while we haven't heard from them, I thought I'd bug 'em to find out the latest. They had this to say:

There has been some interesting discussion on the boards about what this product is and is not going to be. For now we just want to point out that the red camera only listens to a lens, so data display was all the camera could be used for. The AF100 can listen to, and control a lens, so it offers so much more possibility. i.e. the camera control surfaces can be used to control the lens, in addition (or instead of) our external control surfaces. There are some cool features that we will talk about before release, but not just yet.

Sounds pretty good to me... if they make it with no need for an external controller, then maybe they can make that quite affordable. But if they make it so that it can also use an external controller, then that gives 'em the best of both worlds (hopefully an inexpensive direct-control model, and an add-on controller for those who need it?)