m2 Adapter Users - Satisified w/ your investment?

Rich Lee said:
what do you mean? are you physicaly mounting the M2 to the HVX using some sort of ring? or are you saying that alignment would be less tricky if it were a "hard" connection?
Click to expand...
Alignment would be less tricky.

I'm using a technique I read about on the M2 forum. Loosen the camera mount so that it remains connected but can rotate left or right. Next, loosen the M2 from the rails. Fold the rubber hood flat. Now, holding the M2 so it won't slide, orient so the camera is pointing upwards (vertical). Carefully slide the M2 down so that it rests against the outer ring of the achromat. Adjust the alignment of the camera so that it is flush and centered on the M2. You might need to remove the rubber hood to get a flush contact. Now tighten down the camera. At this point you know that the camera is aligned correctly to the M2.

Next, you need to slide the M2 back, pop out the hood, slide the M2 back and to the point where you normally connect it with the achromat. Then go through the back focus adjustment.

Simple! (argh).

I have thought about finding/making a coupling so I don't need to go through this each time I remount my camera. The benefit of a hard coupling (tube) would be to:
  • Remove the rubber hood
  • Remove the filter (another loss of light)
  • Allow quick and easy alignment
 
What about this?!?

What about this?!?

From the Redrock forum:

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:46 pm Post subject: HVX200 + M2: What to Expect
I've been using my new HVX200 with the M2 and M3 element. Here's what to expect if you are planning to use the same:

The camera must be adjusted laterally on the rod support, you can learn how to do this in the M2 tuturials.

You will need a 1/4 + a 1/8 shims for a perfect line up.

To install the shims you must take off the front panel, remove everything inside (which comes out as one piece), and then you will see the hex screws which attach the rod support connector.

You will need an 82mm to 72mm step down ring.

I chose to use Nikon lenses and have no complaints.

I also bought the recommended tripod head from EVS and am very pleased with it. It's a good price for that type of tripod head.

You do not have to worry about seeing the ground-glass while shooting in HD or in higher FPS. This is assuming you have the M3/M2 powered on of course.

To focus on the ground glass I zoom in to 20 and focus at 24. You can see what your focus is in the bootom right corner of your LCD Veiw Finder.

This begs the following question - do we really need the achromat? The HVX has a great macro. I impression was that the achromat was necessary for the dvx and sony's, whose macro lens was not up to par. The pros and cons of avoiding the achromat are obvious:

Pros - brings the lens closest to the M2
fewer step rings
less glass, thus light loss
no need to zoom (the tighter the zoom, the harder it is to focus)

Cons - Using the macro makes focusing on the GG more difficult (its way more sensitive)


I really can't test this theory yet (STILL waiting - 4 weeks), and maybe I am all wrong here on the setup. I ordered the 82-72 step down based on Redrock's advice - I am wondering if i need more! Thanks for any help!

markus
 
Last edited:
Steve Shovlar said:
No colour correction or anything done to the footage which was shot on scene file F6, but you can see its pretty sharp edge to edge.
Click to expand...
I would have to disagree with you here. It's nice looking footage but it also exhibits soft edges. Most of the shots don't have a consistent plane of focus to the edge so it's not possible to verify edge sharpness. But the shot of the two cows lying down around 30 seconds in does. Note the focus on the black cow. Now follow that focus distance in the clip to the left and right edges. It starts getting soft as you move to the edges. The detail of the grass goes very soft.

Now, again, these shots aren't the best for testing edge-to-edge sharpness. If you have a focus chart then I recommend taking a quick clip of one and posting that.
 
HansK said:
But the shot of the two cows lying down around 30 seconds in does. Note the focus on the black cow. Now follow that focus distance in the clip to the left and right edges. It starts getting soft as you move to the edges. The detail of the grass goes very soft.
Click to expand...

That shot was 200mm F2.8, so the depth of field on that shot was extremely shallow.

Take a look at the shot from 21-25 seconds. The label on the cows ear on the left is not soft, other than again the depth of field is so shallow it was not in perfect focus as I focussed on the sport between the cows ears.
 
Thanks for the reply....

Thanks for the reply....

Steve Shovlar said:
Suckram, yo will need an 82/72mm step down ring, and a 72/55mm step down ring.
Click to expand...

Shovelar -

My impression is that the 72/55mm step down ring is for the achromat. If this is true, do you actually need it if you don't use the achromat? Just trying to be clear here.... Thanks for any help you can offer.

markus
 
sukram said:
Shovelar -

My impression is that the 72/55mm step down ring is for the achromat. If this is true, do you actually need it if you don't use the achromat? Just trying to be clear here.... Thanks for any help you can offer.

markus
Click to expand...


I Have just tried to setup the HVX200 without the acromat and it doesn't work. You can't zoon in enough to focus on the GG without the edge of the GG showing. I have a +2 closeup and tried that, and again I can't get in close enough. I am unsure exatly what magnification the M2 acromat is, but should imagine around a +7. If anyone can do it without the acromat let me know your secret please!
 
Steve Shovlar said:
That shot was 200mm F2.8, so the depth of field on that shot was extremely shallow.
Click to expand...
Even with a shallow depth of field you should still have a line of sharpness across the image that follows the focus depth. Stop the clip at the :30 second mark and zoom 200%. The edge blur is very obvious. Pick a location in the center that is in focus. Now follow outward along a line that would be the equivalent distance. Notice how the image gets softer and softer towards the edges. That has nothing to do with DOF.

Here's the clip at the :30 sec mark. Note the focus plane and how the detail blurs the farther towards the edge you move.

cows-30-M2-blur.jpg


Steve Shovlar said:
Take a look at the shot from 21-25 seconds. The label on the cows ear on the left is not soft, other than again the depth of field is so shallow it was not in perfect focus as I focussed on the sport between the cows ears.
Click to expand...
Not a good example because the edge is already out of focus. I agree that the image at that point is nice and does look less blurry at the edges.

Please shoot a focus chart and post that. That will be the real proof.
 
Last edited:
Whilst I agree with what you are saying, I was shooting long and if there was any distortion it's more down to the lens than the M2. With my 17-35mm I am good edge to edge.
 
Last edited:
Steve Shovlar said:
OK here's a res chart I shot a minute ago with a single dedo. Not good light conditions. Noise from HVX, not M2.
Click to expand...
That looks great and I don't see any of the edge blur. Which lens did you use for that? This is all very strange. The image with the cows lying down has definate blur. But your res chart looks great. The difference may be the clue to the blur problem.

Steve, you are a tremendous help to all of us M2 owners. Thanks!
 
Hansk, I used a 17-35mm 2.8. A very wide good lens. The footage with the cows was with an 80-200 2.8, and the cow shot you disected was shot at 200mm.

Interestingly I have just looked up a review of the 80-200mm and they say edges are soft at 2.8, and sharpest at F8, so that again might be the main problem.
 
Steve -- nice cow movie. I really want to be able to shoot like that with my m2 and HVX.

I've been trying to setup my m2 with HVX for about ten days, following all the guidance I can find. Is there a trick that I'm missing? I've got the m2 perfectly aligned to the HVX. The achromat is attached via an 82mm-72mm adapter ring. I've tried folding the rubber gasket back and pushing the achromat up to the M2. I've tried it with the rubber pulled just flush with the back of the first lip of the achromat. I've tried various zooms and focus, using autofocus to focus on the ground glass. Still I've got soft focus on one side and sharper focus in the center and poor focus to the edges. I don't really see too many things I can adjust. Is it possible I have the ground glass the wrong distance from the 35mm lens?


Thanks,

Andy
 
HansK said:
That looks great and I don't see any of the edge blur. Which lens did you use for that? This is all very strange. The image with the cows lying down has definate blur. But your res chart looks great. The difference may be the clue to the blur problem.

Steve, you are a tremendous help to all of us M2 owners. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. Althought the cows footage is really cool, the edge softness is quite visible in the res chart too (at least I see it). Perhaps you could zoom in a little further, Steve... :)
 
I'm a rank amatuer, but couldn't the lack of detail on the sides of the cow footage only appear to be of LESS detail due to the fact that the grass in the middle is highlighted by the black cow (which sits behind it). I would think that the grass on the left and right may look more detailed if there were a couple black cows thrown in there, as well.

On second look however, I see there is a little less detail at the edges, but on a shot like this I'm thinking like a painter who might opt to let the edges lose detail in order to bring attention to the subject.
 
Any softness at the edges is definately the lenses, not the M2. Reviews of the Nikon lenses say that at 2.8 the image is soft at the edges, and that's what I shot at. F8 is sharper, but of course you lose the DOF which I was trying to acheive.

Too busy today to do any more shooting but maybe tomorrow I will shoot some stuff at F8 to see the difference.

It must be said though that no matter what adaptor is used, you are capturing an image through an extra lens onto a piece of spinning glass. Because of this there is bound to be a slight reduction on image quality compared to shooting without an adaptor. The trick is to make the image reduction as minimal as possible.

Here's a few pics of my setup.
hvx_m2-005.jpg


http://www.steveshovlar.com/hvx_m2-001.jpg
http://www.steveshovlar.com/hvx_m2-002.jpg
http://www.steveshovlar.com/hvx_m2-003.jpg
http://www.steveshovlar.com/hvx_m2-004.jpg


I am selling the Teletest monitor this week. It is a professional monitor and costs over $2000 new. It has flip and mirror and runs off Sony batteries. Perfect condition. Look out for it on ebay. I will let it go for £600 and I take paypal!
 
Last edited:
Because I purchased a Marshall in a very good deal with a friend. I haven't seen the Marshall in action yet but word out it was good, though no flip.

Not sure if I made the right decision but I will compare when the Marshall arrives today or tomorrow. Meant to be higher res.

The Teletest is a rolls royce of monitors.
http://www.teletest.co.uk/productinfo.asp?id=44
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top