New 35mm adapter

Speaking of the Go35HD, any progress reports there? Will the HD using a similar difusser as the Pro?

A while back you had mentioned selling your diffuser screens? Is that still an option for the hardcore DIY-ers?
 
i have been following this thread for a very long time so forgive me for asking this, but because i am now lost with the 35mm adapter threads, i dont remember all the content: so here is the question.

is there a rail system for it, as well as a follow focus?
 
DJ Lewis said:
Speaking of the Go35HD, any progress reports there? Will the HD using a similar difusser as the Pro?

A while back you had mentioned selling your diffuser screens? Is that still an option for the hardcore DIY-ers?
Click to expand...

Go35HD: I'll have a working prototype in just under two weeks. The diffuser will be different, as a moving adapter frees you up to use a screen with a larger, "looser" grain structure that is engineered to be more efficient with the light. The design goals of a static adapter are necessarily different where the diffuser is concerned.

I will most likely be selling the diffusers -- definitely the SD, and most likely the Pro. SD will be about $40, the Pro closer to $100-150. I anticipate some balking at the Pro price, but understand I spent 3 years and a lot of money, time and energy arriving where I have -- I can't sell it so cheaply that I'm putting myself out of business selling to people who are going to pair it with $100 worth of eBay'd parts...
 
Yes. I switch between a Century Optics +7 achromat and an Asian +10 macro and both work equally well for this adapter with the GL1.

The footage of the girl outside was shot with the Asian +10.

I think the Asian +10 is a fine solution for the 58mm cams out there -- I need to check out some VX-2x00s to see...

Right now the Pro unit is on set of a music video -- no more tests or footage until after it returns on Thursday. I'll post the music vid when it's complete.
 
That's a very very interesting test, Dan. After watching that I'll never use a macro with a 35mm adapter again.
 
That test has been shown before. My question though is why doesn't it seem so apparent in the actual adapter footage? I would think that it would be much more readily visible. Obviously the achromat gives better results (you get what you pay for), but I'm not understanding why it doesn't come through in Jim's footage.
 
I think Dan’s test is done using stacked macros. The results are not as bad when you use only one macro.

Still, there is no question a good quality achromat will yield better results.
 
dan said:
What????? Someone turning water into wine in that neighborhood?:
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/albums/album06/Achromatic_vs_macro.wmv
Joke aside, I didn't manage NOT to see the difference. (hmmm... I must be missing something here....)
Click to expand...

I'll be happy to show you comparison footage when I get the adapter back. For all your tests, the results you're convinced of simply don't show in actual footage with my adapter. Perhaps you should be checking distances from the lens to the subject before drawing your crass conclusions that I'm trying to pull a fast one.
 
Deadline for the logo contest still stands at April 14th. I'll pick the winners but show the gallery of all the entries unless anyone opposes.
 
ovjamaica said:
Obviously the achromat gives better results (you get what you pay for), but I'm not understanding why it doesn't come through in Jim's footage.
Click to expand...

If I had to guess why it doesn't show up, I'd say it's due to one of two, or possibly both things: the adapter prototype I'm using places the GG approximately 55mm from the macro; and I'm generally using only one +10 on a cam with a 58mm barrel (GL1), so zooming places the edge distortion outside the imaging area.

It does show up, but only slightly at the edges, on the DVX, BTW -- but I cannot for the life of me figure out how Mike Dawson got a double stacked macro setup working without distortion. At 55mm with two +10 macros, footage was nothing but blurry mush -- at closer, say 35-40mm the footage was clearly there but edge blur was ridiculous. With just one +10 macro the footage looks acceptable -- so much so that the adapter's being used on a music video shoot as we speak...

On that note, I am having custom achromats machined for DVX users...
 
Just piping in to say that I've still got my fingers crossed for the HD version. I can't wait to see some tests.

Sending good vibes your way.

-rook
 
Thanks for the good vibes. Unless something catostrophic happens to myself or the engineer, the HD is on its way -- no fingers necessary :)
 
hey you guys, i watched his footage on a DVD, the Go35 pro version,

( i just put the full rez quicktimes on a DVD)

It really looked AMAZING!!

Very crisp, even though it was from a compressed quicktime.

This guy has somethign going.


Whats your name BTW, BklynDV?
 
yeah...that's all i have to say...and yeah, i'm bought on this stuff and screw all the HD versions for me, and the other chaps out there. I'm waiting for Jim's pro version and that's that. so should everyone else.

Rh
 
jim, what is the lens mount situation looking like? are you gonna include one; what mounts (nikon/canon) will you be offering, or will we get them from other sources?

thanks:huh:
 
From what he has said before he will be offering the Nikon F-mount initially, with the possibility of doing other types of mounts later. This may have changed though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top