Which follow focus for the RED?

F

f92mlu

New member
Hi all!

I've been reading and enjoying all your posts now for quite awhile. I have reserved the camera and zoom and are now trying to prepare for it's arrival...6-12 months from now hopefully!

It's a big leap for me...exposure doesn't scare me...the nice tools Graeme has been talking about sounds great.

But focusing... I would really like to learn and...not master...but at least be able to use a follow focus system with some precision.

Are they standardized in how they connect to the focusing ring? I would like something that is high quality and something I can use for a long time...in other words...I'm ready to do some investing in a good piece of equipment if it's worth it.

What would you recommend for a beginner in this area?
I will initially use it together with the zoom lens.

Thanks all!

/Marcus

To the RED team:
I admire your enthousiasm and all the energy you put into this project.
I wish you all great success, a profitable company that deliver great products...and lots of stock options to the dedicated team!!!
 
I have been intrigued by this follow focus:
http://www.arri.com/prod/cam/lff/lff.htm

There are many cheaper options..but you usually get what you pay for.

Redrock has one, but I'm not sure if it is cine lens compatible. It sure works for slr lenses though.

I don't know how much the ARRI lff1 costs and I emailed abel about it and have not received a response. Has anyone here used it? If so, how do you like it?

One of the main things to be concerned about is the amount of backlash a follow focus unit has.

A friend of mine uses the Chroziel FF and he says it works really well.
 
arri has a price list PDF on their site ..
from what i can see the LFF 1 is 3455 euros (page 68 may 2006 catalogue)
 
ha ha ha so true Brook.

Keep in mind when your justifying the expense, focus is gonna be very critical to get good pictures. Your dealing with a very very shallow depth of field wide open, and you dont have any autofocus.. after a few soft shots that $4000 rip off may be a little easier to digest.

That said.. Graeme has developed a pretty incredible focus assist.
 
tonacidigital said:
thanks donatello. just did the currency conversion... whoa mama..4,377.14 USD
Click to expand...

The Arri FF4 is a bit cheaper at 2500 USD which is only a bit more than the Chrosziel

Martin
 
Of course, of course, I fully understand that it pays for itself. I just maintain that even the strictest reasonable mechanical tolerances could be maintained on such a device and it still wouldn't get into the $4,000 range. Even though I understand the low number of these devices that will be produced, etc. It's a moot point and not an argument for this thread. :laugh:

That said, I wouldn't mind one...
 
After the dust settles with the camera, current accessories, and zoom + prime are all released...perhaps the RED team can consider making the ultimate follow focus to match the RED styling. While I am at it.. in 2008, (I know prime sets are probably not on the RED radar right now)...but it would be cool if they could release a super speed prime set on par..if not surpassing cooke s4s and zeiss master primes.
 
Brook Willard said:
Of course, of course, I fully understand that it pays for itself. I just maintain that even the strictest reasonable mechanical tolerances could be maintained on such a device and it still wouldn't get into the $4,000 range. Even though I understand the low number of these devices that will be produced, etc. It's a moot point and not an argument for this thread. :laugh:

That said, I wouldn't mind one...
Click to expand...

I agree. I could probably get my local machinist to fabricate one using aircraft grade composites and steel for half that cost. And I bet you it would be alot more durable.
 
acehole111 said:
I agree. I could probably get my local machinist to fabricate one using aircraft grade composites and steel for half that cost. And I bet you it would be alot more durable.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that follow focus units seem very expensive on the whole, but I wouldn't under estimate the design input necessary to engineer something that really performs well either. What works for you will depend very much on what your requirements are. How much versatility and ruggedness do you need? are you using the ff on many different camera setups or just one? 19mm rods or 15mm rods? do you need something really light weight for hand held use of are you using big studio lenses? Do you have an AC or are you pulling your own focus? are you going to look after your kit or are you going to be hiring it out? If you are an owner operator using the follow focus on one camera you don't need to pay for the ruggedness and versatility of some of the higher end solutions. If you are a hire company renting kit out ruggedness and versatility is key. If you regularly work with a large expensive crew you can probably justify the cost of an Arri FF3 or Willytec, by the slight increase in productivity it brings. It is a very different calculation if you are running a small cheap crew, or doing your own focusing.

You can find follow focus solutions to cover pretty much any budget, from the IndieFocus and Redrock through Petroff, Cavision, Vocas, on up to the CineTech, Chrosziel, Arri, Willytec units and they each have their strengths and weaknesses. I don't think you need to feel that more expensive is necessarily better however but it may well be more appropriate in particular situations. The costs can be very high but I think that reflects the size of the marketplace which is very small. Of course this is what makes the RED business model so interesting. If they can stimulate a bigger market they could produce a very high quality follow focus that should cost a lot less.

This thread contains some interesting insights on requirements: http://www.cinematography.net/Pages%20DW/Follow_Focus_Units.htm

Martin
 
tonacidigital said:
After the dust settles with the camera, current accessories, and zoom + prime are all released...perhaps the RED team can consider making the ultimate follow focus to match the RED styling.
Click to expand...

I have the same feeling.... RED could make a follow focus and a matte box to add to their accessories...:Drogar-Love(DBG):
 
In a perfect world, I'd take a wireless follow focus. That said, I'm not expecting too much from RED in this department - at least not for a while. They have their hands full enough with the camera.
 
Well, hell, if we're dreaming, I might as well come up with dream features:

I'd want the motor small and simple [compare to the BFD or ARRI's units]
I'd want to be able to program my focus distances into the remote. Allow me to explain. On the BFD, one attaches a small bit of plastic around the focus knob and marks the focus distances on with a pen. Turn the knob until the lens is at infinity, mark "infinity" on the remote. Turn it to 60', mark "60'" on the remote. What the AC is left with is a series of written marks on the remote knob that correspond to the focus marks on the lens... easy.

What I'd want is something digital. You would still have to go through the same initial process with each lens, but rather than writing the focus marks on a sheet of plastic, you'd enter them digitally. Turn the remote until the lens is at infinity, then select "infinity" on the remote display. Turn it to 60', select "60'" on the display, etc.

This would afford some nifty benefits. First off, after entering every marked measurement on the lens, the remote could calculate the proper increments in between the marks, based on a logarithmic curve that the system could evaluate. That way the user wouldn't have to "guess" when they're in between points, they could still pull to an exact number.

The remote could switch between log and linear for pulling. On a lens, the rotational distance between 12" and 4' may be greater than 50' to infinity. In "standard" log mode, the remote would maintain this ratio of the lens [read: the motor turns at a rate constant to the knob's turning]. In "linear" mode, the system could calculate the difference in motor speed needed to keep every distance [say 1' to 2' the same as 30' to 31'] to a linear ratio on the knob. For precise pulling at long focal lengths and short distances to the subjects, this could be invaluable. Obviously the knob-to-lens ratio could be adjusted as well.

Data for different lenses could be saved on the remote. Switching to the Master Prime 25mm? Pull up that profile on the remote, turn the knob until the lens is at the close focus mark and press the "set" button. Presto-changeo, the remote is calibrated for that lens.

The remote could even have some focus point programmability. For example, set focus on the first subject and store it as point 1. Set focus on the second subject and store it as 2. During the shot the AC could just press a button and have the lens snap from point 1 to point 2, eliminating operator error. This obviously wouldn't work for more 'fluid' shots with moving subjects, but it could still come in handy here and there.

I could go on all day with fun little features, but it's a pipe-dream. Who wants to make the remote focus device of my dreams? :laugh:
 
Keep in mind that follow-focus systems:

- mount to the camera via iris rods, which come in several different standards 8mm; 15mm; 19mm with OC dimensions of 60mm and 100mm among others. I estimate that, based on the weight of RED, you'd choose 15mm rods - however, based on the PL mount lenses that RED will best perform under, you'll be in 19mm Arri-style rods for that heavy glass.

- must be matched to whatever lenses you choose, therefore, this is less a RED question than it is a lensing question

- must be capable of to-the-degree accuracy for 4k production. Where a 1 or 2 degree backlash might be usable / functional on a SD or 720p system, less than 1 degree will be demanded on a 4k or UHD system. I read a good bit here from users who hope to throw a $100 piece of glass in front of this camera - and I tell you right now: it just ain't gonna fly**.

[EDIT] ** Unless you shoot music videos exclusively - in which case, who cares what glass you shoot with?! Effortlessly dismiss any aberration or other image shortcomings to elective "artistic expression" and be done with it. Fisher Price created a nice set of PL primes in 1996 for their My First Super35 Playset (actually a 2-perf system that recorded to audio cassette tape). Good luck.

e
 
Last edited:
overlandfilms said:
must be matched to whatever lenses you choose, therefore, this is less a RED question than it is a lensing question

- must be capable of to-the-degree accuracy for 4k production. Where a 1 or 2 degree backlash might be usable / functional on a SD or 720p system, less than 1 degree will be demanded on a 4k or UHD system. I read a good bit here from users who hope to throw a $100 piece of glass in front of this camera - and I tell you right now: it just ain't gonna fly**.

e
Click to expand...

What follow focus do you like to use with a compact zoom, or standard 50mm prime ? For 15mm or 19mm rods ? Just wonderin' ;) BTW, what's you thoughts on remotes ?

Keep in mind, the best ff unit on the planet can't compare to an AC who has great instincts and skills...Just a reminder that the people behind the camera are the real investment.


:beer: :beer: :beer:

RED# rebel with a clue
 
D&G is right - having an AC who can hit her marks might be able to coax almost any system to the task.

I use the bargain-basement indiFOCUS on our HVX. This is a great unit for less than $400 - complete with gear set-up and whip extension. Cavision products also represent an excellent value at $1000 out the door.

At the other end of the spectrum, I've operated Panavision studio follow-focus on GII and Platinum. I've never assisted with a wireless follow-focus, but it's really odd to even discuss what we think about systems like the Aladin when we're discussing Minolta or Nikor lenses in the same breath.

Do you see where this doesn't reconcile? There is plenty of room to skimp in independent film - for example, PVC pipe might be a fine substitute for a 10' dolly run, but I just can't see how anyone is going to image to a 27mm sensor with a beat to hell piece of eBay glass. We have ten discussions on these boards about "...when is RED going to come out with Nikon mounts?" What?! Or, coming in the near future, "...does a 720 x 480 Pyle headrest monitor have enough resolution / colorspace for my RED with Zeiss SuperSpeeds?"

Look, regardless of what you might think, or what you've been told, RED is going to be an significantly more expensive system to shoot on if you're accustommed to sourcing on a DVX or even an HVX. Paramount to [increased operational] expense will be post-workflow. Only those who already handle real 2k production (as in 2k HD from acqusition through to deliverables) have any concept of what this is going to cost. For everyone else, it's going to be a rude, rude shock.

It'll be somewhere between 2/3" HDCam and Super16mm film or even 35mm depending on your post workflow (e.g., digital intermediates over pure film). If you've managed these formats digitally, then you won't be surprised.

But I digress. Again, I don't know the spec on RED for integrated rods. I'm venturing that they're 15mm at 60mm O.C. - so I plan to put a geared Cavision, RedRock or indiFOCUS on there and put a little of that $1k++ that's left over (by opting out of Arri or Chrosziel) into renting the set of PL mount Cooke S4s that live here in Charlotte.

e
 
Last edited:
overlandfilms said:
I read a good bit here from users who hope to throw a $100 piece of glass in front of this camera - and I tell you right now: it just ain't gonna fly**
Click to expand...

Not quite fair. Optically there is no problem, good still lenses will perform very well. The thing that really separates still lenses from cinematography lenses are the mechanics and the physical design. Cinematography lenses are designed for using with a follow focus, they have large markings so everyone can see what they are doing. They are designed to minimise breathing, it is just that they are optimised for cinematography. I don't think anyone would argue that a still lens isn't a compromise but that compromise isn't in the quality of the optics it is in their operational design. The Nikon 50mm f/1.8 is a stunning piece of glass, and can be picked up for about $60 second hand. You won't be able to get the same shots you could with a good cinematography lens because you can't pull focus in the same way not because the glass isn't up to it.

It is about being creative and making the most of what is available, but to some extent that is always the case. You could argue that the red camera wont "fly" unless you have a motion control rig, or a huge crew, or a helicopter (it will definitely fly then)... There are shots that require these things, but if you haven't got them you make do, or on occasions hire them in. If you need a shot which requires deep depth of field and tricky focus following then it is probably worth hiring in an appropriate cinematography lens, but for the rest of the time work with the still lenses, it won't be an inferior image, it will just limit your choices and force you to be more creative.

Martin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top