LEX with HVX ring and EX Achromat

T

Tim Naylor

Veteran
After a flurry of buying and selling, my rig has settled into a LEX with EX Achromat and step down ring for HVX. Haven't tested it on EX yet but on my HVX it's a world of difference. Gone are the soft edges that made me sell the old one. Infinity focus is where it should be. Plan to shoot a little Brooklyn this weekend.

In short the improvements overall are great. The beefier Nikon mount looks and feels solid with no jiggle. Unfortunately mine isn't quite locking on several of my lenses but Hien assures me this is an anomaly and is helping get it right. The only real improvement I'd like to see is a more rigid rod bracket. Perhaps a two posted design with a brace that encircles the LEX. I'm sure that would cost more but I believe any way you can lose more flex the better. Especially after using step down brackets or raised platforms, flex becomes an issue with long lenses and follow focuses. And then there's the image centering, still off by ten percent or so. I hope image centering will be an Ultimate feature but also standard in the next revision of the LEX.

Other than that same old. Sharp as hell and little light loss.

Time to shoot

Tim
 
Okay, thanks for clearing that up.

Sometimes trying to find out accurate Letus information is difficult.

Dan
 
What rails/rods are you using with your Extreme? Pictures?

Glad to hear that you're much more satisfied with your unit. Gotta have that light loss factor.
 
The Nikon mount is fine. I just wasn't lining it up properly. In fact it's quite superb compared to the old one.

Hien emailed me the right way to do it.
 
The Rig
I saw a photo of the way Phil Bloom did his LEX rig and it made so much sense. I used to have snorkel up. With the snorkel down it does a few things:

1) significantly lowers the CG making hand held a pleasure. Will be modifying Cavision shoulder mount so I can screw it in to the bottom of the Zacuto baseplate intead of attaching to rods and sticking out the rear. This will keeps my arms closer and less tired.

2) I now only use one piece of my Z riser. If you look at the Zacuto catalogue, the Z riser is a two piece. In this low mode - snorkel down, you can lose the second piece saving on weight and increasing rigidity. The bottom rods screw in to the bracket - no clamps. Super stiff.

3) The Marshall is mounted to Heavy Duty Manfrotto Ball mount to Arm Bones to SG pro bracket (robbed from my SG kit). When I go hand held, I move the SG bracket down to the front rods. The low mode gives much more room to mount the bracket and still have my hand held grips in place.

4) Follow Focus is Chrosziel and the Matte Box is Timurs. Just placed my order for the RR mattebox.

Only new mod I'll be making is upgrading to Nebtek monitor. Need that focus edge enhancement as well as better pic. Also, should have EX real soon. Love to do hand held without a monitor at all.

WISHLIST for OTHER ROD MAKERS
I really wish the adaptor makers would get off the platform shoes look. When you got this much extra baggage on a camera, CG is a big deal. When it's low it gives you better/smoother tilts (especially with low cost tripods that don't have a wide range of tension) and for hand held a much more manuverable and stable platform. They should wear one of the high riser rigs on their shoulder for a day and see why they just plain suck.


They could take their existing designs some non-platform design and just create a solid step down bracket for a second set of rods. Do it for less than Zacuto and you got something. Otherwise, those rigs just seem overbuilt and more recently over - engineered.

Aside from a Low CG, rigidity is paramount. Flex in a rod system affects everything from vibration in the image, alignment and sure traction on your follow focus. You got a still lens, an adaptor and a camera all riding the same rail. A lot can bend in that chain. Lower, simpler, and tight tolerances keep it stiff. Zacuto nailed it. I just wish it didn't run me over a grand. If it's any consolation - it's cheaper than ARRI.

When I put together a rig, I think of how I'll feel in the last two or three hours of a 15 hour day or so. For instance, Cavision has their bullhorn grips six inches out on each side. There seems to be no consideration that a camera only rests on one shoulder. Which means they should not be equally wide but offset. I modified mine to be offset so both of your arms aim straight in front of you - no twist. It reduces fatigue. Also gets you through tight quarters. The problem with Cavision is that their grips were never designed to handle much weight. They slip. I'll be hunting down some serrated washers or something in an attempt to get a more secure tension on the grips. In the meantime, you have to crank them down with all your strength.

Anyway, in a perfect world the camera makers would add a flip but I feel they think that would be an admission to their cameras shortcomings. Imagine using a non-flip LEX, Brevis or SG without an external monitor. Until then.....
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6402.jpg
    IMG_6402.jpg
    220.3 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_6406.jpg
    IMG_6406.jpg
    232.6 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_6400.jpg
    IMG_6400.jpg
    184.7 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Gah... Looks like I'm gonna have to go that route instead of sticking with this Cavision setup.
 
You'll love it. Absolutely no flex. See if Zacuto will sell the part you need instead of the whole Z riser set up. May save a buck.
 
So essentially, Tim is using the Q-release. If you wish to follow this setup, you should be able to purchase the Q-release instead of the the z-riser. Difference in price: $330 to $175.

It does exactly what he uses it for. Clamps on one set of rods and the other set of rods thread right into it. You would have to use zacuto rods to do this. Definitely, more cost efficient and I'd assume just as sturdy, considering the Q-release is intended to connect a shoulder pad with the weight of the rig resting above. I've had the Q-release and there was no flex.
 
Arrik said:
So essentially, Tim is using the Q-release. If you wish to follow this setup, you should be able to purchase the Q-release instead of the the z-riser. Difference in price: $330 to $175.

It does exactly what he uses it for. Clamps on one set of rods and the other set of rods thread right into it. You would have to use zacuto rods to do this. Definitely, more cost efficient.
Click to expand...

Damn, you're telling me I wasted a hundred a fifty bucks! Half a Z riser for sale. 100 and it's yours. It really makes burns me up that it took so long to realize that the whole Z riser setup is half useless. I saw Phil Blooms set up and tried it with the whole Z Riser then all of sudden I noticed holes with threading in one piece. My Z rods have threads too. Why not go straight into those holes, lose the riser and adjust height with the baseplate. Simplicity rules. Riser Schmizer....

Do you think Zacuto knew of this? All the examples on their site are snorkel up.
 
Last edited:
I always wondered why the z-riser was necessary considering the q-release does the same thing. However, the z-riser does give you the added benefit of a quick release, in the event that you wanted to switch out rods. For this application though, quick release hardly seem necessary or beneficial given the added weight.

What would be interesting to find out is if the z-riser is composed of the Q-release + the extra part that you took off. Or if what you are using is somehow unique from the q-release. From the pics you posted they look the same. If its the same, im sure someone may purchase it off you to turn their q-release into a z-riser.
 
Arrik said:
So essentially, Tim is using the Q-release. If you wish to follow this setup, you should be able to purchase the Q-release instead of the the z-riser. Difference in price: $330 to $175.

It does exactly what he uses it for. Clamps on one set of rods and the other set of rods thread right into it. You would have to use zacuto rods to do this. Definitely, more cost efficient and I'd assume just as sturdy, considering the Q-release is intended to connect a shoulder pad with the weight of the rig resting above. I've had the Q-release and there was no flex.
Click to expand...

Why only Zacuto Rods? No other rods will work?
 
well, i mean zacuto rods with the matching threading. If there are other rods out there that have male/female threading that matches the zacuto products then I'm sure you'll be fine.

Most rods I see are cut clean at the edges, not threaded. Having the threading is actually a really useful feature, especially if you use long lenses. Just thread another set of rods to extend the rod length and you can now add a support to that 80-200mm nikon. Its actually the only thing I miss about not having z-rods anymore.
 
Oh I had no idea that Z-rods had threads! crazy. Alright I guess I can't use the Rizer. Sniff sniffle. But 100 is a good deal, Tim. The good thing is that your setup will work just fine for your Ultimate when you get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top