mini35 Adapter comparisons

[eppdidit]

Wanted to hear from some of you who have experience with the mini 35 adapters. I've read many posts in here and I'm seeing at least 3 different versions of these adapters:

Redrockmicro.com has the Micro35
P & S Technik has the Mini35
Guerilla35.com has the Guerilla35

What does any one of these have an advantage over the other besides cost?

thanks!!!

[thisiswells]

Only one of them is available to buy/use right now (P+S Mini35). The others aren't.

The others are expected to be shipping by end of summer, likely earlier than that. The one from Redrockmicro.com appears to have the advantage based on the frame grabs I've seen on this website and that it costs less than the one from Guerilla35.com. Oh, and the recorded image is upside down on the Redrock and Guerilla models. Yes, that's a bummer, but it makes available a capability I wouldn't be able to own otherwise. (using 35mm lenses with DV) Renting a Mini35 has always been an option, of course.

The "regulars" on this forum have debated this topic tirelessly. (which is better, etc.) I would encourage you and others who stumble upon this thread to search the forums for the opinions of many. The darndest truth is only a small handful of people have beta tester versions of the forthcoming models and they ain't talking. Hope this helps.

[Jay Rodriguez]

<--- that's me trying to find loose change in my car to save up for a micro35....

I like the one from Redrockmicro.com as well......

[thisiswells]

Come on.. cash in a few more of those downgraded shares!

[Dizkoteck]

I do have a few questions regarding the models other than the P+S(cause of the price).

Based on their screengrabs, footage and some knowledge of construction from both, which has the advantage over the others? Is there that much of a difference?

Also, using Nikon/Canon lenses, will I be able to attach a mattebox over them? Sorry about this question is dumb, havent gone that far into exploration.

[ddh]

The issues on static non-moving screen adaptors (G35) and rotating/vibrating screen adaptors (mini-35 & micro-35) has been noice, loosing light at the F stops, needs for rail support and a host of other issues covered well by a lot of experimenters ever since the Augus-35 was built. My interest is to get the best possible (DOF) image with the least amount of hassle. "macgregor" on this forum has G-35 footage up that's pretty impressive. The Fall is around the corner, so, I'm scaping as much money as possible together to move along with the HVX and some form of adaptor.

[Policar]

I talked with a DP today who told me that he usually likes to shoot 35mm at f4 and 16mm at f2.8, while all of us are dreaming of shooting at f1.4.

Let me tell you, I've tried it, and it's a pain. While ultra-shallow DOF is a nice tool to have, deep focus cinematography is much trickier and more professional looking than shallow DOF.

Considering f4 at 35mm is about equal to f1.8 on a 2/3'' CCD, I still think using a varicam or something with standard lenses is a much better solution, although obviously cost prohibitive. I'm going to get a 35mm adapter, but I'd rather have a deeper DOF, since stopping down beyond f2.8 causes grain and I'd like to be able to shoot some scenes at f5.6 (and probably still will.) Also, in progressive mode and with a 35mm adapter, the ASA of the dvx will effectively be somewhere between 60-120 probably. If I want to shoot at f5.6 and not f1.4, that's like 15-30ASA. Yikes! Better buy a lot of lights.

[Shaw]

I couldn't agree more Policar. If I buy an adapter I'll be using it at f4 or higher most of the time. f1.4 is great for some situations but shooting an entire movie at "wide open" is a bad idea IMO.

[Dizkoteck]

G35, static no moving parts - Micro35 and Mini35, spinning rotating parts

It seems both do the trick, but what and why the differences?

[Shaw]

Static is hard to achieve because the screen you focus on needs to be nearly grainless. This is very hard to achieve. The spinning versions use motion to blur the grain so you don't see it.