cinemek's g35? what happened? lol

slinks

slinks

Well-known member
G35 also known as guerilla 35.

I remember everyone was so gung ho about this adapter, I know I loved the footage that it produced...seems like they fell off the earth. Anyone know if they are still working on it or are they game over?
 
I write Jonathan Houser from time to time and he says they are still working on it. But it's been more than an year since the initial date that it was supposed to be released. I simply don't know if they just gave up (HOPE NOT!!!) or if they are still working on their magic. It's a real shame. The footage was the most film like I've ever seen. I actualy contacted everybody I know of that have a G35 to try to buy it...but no go. People who own it know it's an amazing tool. I really don't understant why Jonathan canceled it so close to the "opening day". Macgregor has been shooting with the FX1 and XL H1 and there's NO GRAIN. He should have let the people decide. A lot 35mm adapter manufacturers give the users different options (static, pro, moving, etc). There's still a lot of people working with SD that would have bought it for sure. Actualy, there's a lot of people using HD that would have bought it (ME!!!!). I really hope the G35 comes back.
 
Last edited:
thanks for the info rawfa. Yea I really was ready to get the g35 as well.

Oh well, I guess its on for the search for another adapter again. I may just end up getting the m2 when I have enough cash.
 
Not to say Go35 is a bad adapter. I've seen some nice stuff from it. But visit www.cinemek.com, check the video sample section and you'll see that the videos produced with the Go35 have nothing to do with the ones produced with the G35. There's a lot of very good adapter out there these days, but PERSONALLY (I can't stress this word enough) the G35 produces the best images (once more, this is MY personal opinion). I know, it's a static adapter, but I'm talking about the final result image wise. I have never seen any footage as film like as the ones it produces. I would definitely use many of the other available present alternatives happily (there's some serious quality products out there)...but if I HAD to choose only one I would go with the G35.
 
Last edited:
I already checked that before. I really don't think it looks as good as the G35. Just a personal opinion. I find it too soft (you can see the texture of the ground glass) and the colors are kind of flat.

BTW, the link is not working right now.
 
Dude, the stuff on the cinemek site is like webcompressed to half its origional size.if i took out of focus footage and made it smaller it sould look sharper.

The whole point of this post is to say, why are you waiting for a product that mostl likley wont be released. when yo ucan have something that resembles its performance RIGHT NOW. i mean take your pick, Brevis, Sgpro, Go35, M2...... they aperform about he same. Most of that "film look" is good use of light, and CC. The stuff i posted wasnt CCed at all. that was straght form the camera. The colors are flat because thats the proper way of capturing footage for manipulation in post. I didint do it, but ifigured people may want ot paly with the grabs and clips. so they can see for themselves.
 
I totally agree with you. By no means I intended to say these adapters you mentioned are bad (I REALLY like some of them) or that your footage is bad. Not at all. I really liked your footage. I'm just commenting the statement you made about the G35 and the Go35 being identical.

btw, I already tested the M2, the Brevis35 and the letus35
 
I thikn the fotage i see reminds me of the G35 when i see go35. Look in to Marty Martin's new film. he shot it on Go35, you can see it there in capable hands. Jsut so you can see what it can do. i think that "feel" the g35 adds, is relicated in go35. My opnion.. lol we agree to disagre. :)
 
Last edited:
Go35 "VS" G35

Go35 "VS" G35

I don't see where G35 outperforms Go35 anymore. Grain? MacGregor and even Policar (at DVInfo) have previously stated that G35 gets grainier after f2.8 and so does Go35.

I looked at low compressed Similo and Smile shorts (both my MacGregor with G35 beta) and both had similiar static grain as Go35. Look at those grabs from Amulet Man Policar posted, they also have that static grain pattern visible. Funny note: MacGregor seems to be getting a Letus adapter soon, at least he stated so at that XL-H1 forum where they are talking about that Smile short.

Most Go35 Beta stuff posted had the older diffuser with more diffusion which led to soft pictures, new one is as sharp as it gets.

G35 is amazing adapter but it's nothing THAT unique. Too bad that almost everything shot with it is done so professionally, it's hard for people to judge the adapter itself.

Note to Jim Lafferty: you must get a hold of G35 beta unit and do a side-by-side comprassion!
 
In my opinion the G35 pics are very grainy in comparsion with my selfmade wax-gg's. If you build yourself some wax-gg's with the waxes i mentioned in my tutorial you can get better results. It depends then only which condenser lens and achromat you use.
 
It is quite easy to make static adapter with less static grain indeed. The hard part is to get the diffusion to the right level where it's a good compromise between bokeh, grain and light loss.
 
2cents

2cents

I suppose the G35 had great bokeh very little grain being a static adapter. I think the Go35 will need to be in more hands to be crowned equal or greater than the G35. Did anyone do a light test with the G35?
 
The Go35 ( i know about it because i have been assisting Jim alot with it lately) is about im guessing 99% complete. that balance between Grain, lightloss and Bokeh is what needs ironing out. but think its current balance is good.

its sharp and has good bokeh, with acceptable light loss. Grain can be a problem, with the current Diffuser. but its a sacrifice that is easily overcome.
 
I've been interested in doing a Go35 / G35 side by side for a while now. I would be willing to ship a test Go35 unit to someone currently shooting with a G35 Beta if they would do a fair and balanced write-up. In fact, I wrote Policar a while ago suggesting this, but his DVX was broken at the time :(

I'd also like to be given the chance to look over the results first and see if I can improve the diffuser to get to the same spot the G35 diffuser is -- as of now I'm sort of shooting in the dark at an unknown target.

To put it another way, if Policar or anyone shooting with a G35 beta could answer these questions, then I'd know where I stand:

1) What's the minimum lighting you need to comfortably shoot interiors with the G35?

2) What's the maximum aperture you can set your SLR lens to using the minimum lighting for interiors and still get a "grainless" image? In other words, I can comfortably say the Go35 has a grainless image at f/2.0 with very little light (two 40w compact fluoro lamps in a windowless room). What numbers would the G35 give?

3) What's a general understanding of the G35's light loss? 1.5 to 2 stops? More or less?

4) What is the maximum f stop the adapter can go to for bright exteriors and still appear "grainless"?

5) Can you give us the lowdown on the lens(es) and lighting for each of the above shots?

Otherwise, I'm happy with my product and stand by it, but I do feel the G35 hype is pretty carefully constructed under some very lax scrutiny relative to what other adapter's receive -- when was the last time (ever?) you saw someone shoot a res chart with the G35, or simply put it through its paces in a test environment, then show the footage at full res?

I think Mtech's comments reflect a better BS detector in action, and a more accurate understanding of how these adapters compare.

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