Anyone own this?

"All of that makes sense, except THE35mm adapter is merely a ground glass viewfinder at heart. How re-imaging a viewfinder screen to video would result in higher resolution in somewhat beyond me."

I look at it more like a periscope than a viewfinder sending the light through a few mirrors and a piece of glass. Yes glass is our friend and our enemy. Glass can focus and glass can blur. Did you know the average broadcast lens has some 18 individual pieces of glass in it? Thats a lot of glass. So the idea is to make sure the glass and the coatings on it do their best to make as good a picture as possible. Of course you also get what you pay for so don't expect the same lens quality on a $3000 camera as you can in an individual $20,000 lens.

I think we have to turn off logic for a second. See as much as we use numbers and the like to represent resolution and all the other stuff, our mind is in interpreter. Sharpness is a psycho-visual sensation in our mind and as such beyond the numbers that some like to use to represent definition, there is so much more. Take HD for example. If I took a standard definition set playing footage and placed it three picture heights from me, then took an HD set playing the same footage in HD and placed it three picture heights from me I could not tell which was the HD and which the SD. Part of the reason is that our mind sees contrast over definition let alone that our eyes can only see only so much sharpness. So lens manufactures often concentrate on lenses reproducing contrast correctly as that is what we see much more than what we call resolution. Then of course the other problem is our brain itself. Depending on where you are standing, what the light is like where you are and what color you are looking at your brain can create quite an illusion. But then again isn't film nothing more than an illusion of still pictures? An interesting read:

http://persci.mit.edu/people/adelson/publications/gazzan.dir/gazzan.htm

and two articles on the perception of resolution from my website (if you have not already seen them)

http://www.bluesky-web.com/high-and-why.html
http://www.bluesky-web.com/numbers-mean-little.htm
 
Walter,

Your ideas are interesting to me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

:happy:
 
Hey all - it's great to see so much interest.

overland - "On several occassions, I've emailed the upstart with credit card in hand and had no response..."

I'm not sure to what you are referring, but since I have been on board I have responded to every email I received, usually within 24 hours. Prior to the online ordering at our website we did not want to take any orders until we felt we could deliver the product - and now we are taking orders. If you have placed an order via our website, you are definitely in line. If you have any questions, please feel free to email me directly bvalente@redrockmicro.com. Anyone else who has questions can email me as well. There is no mystery on ordering - if you order one, you are in line to get one.

Just to clarify, the $500 micro35 is not a "preassembled kit". Every since the DIY version, everyone has asked for a preassembled unit, but wanted better quality in the parts, macro, etc. So we ended up designing and building a professionally manufactured unit. It shares only the basic design of the DIY Guide version.

As for sample footage, tests, comparisons, etc. we are delivering a unit to Barry so everyone can have an objective and professional reference.

For questions on pricing or "what do I get for $x amount of money" simply go to our website www.redrock.com and go into the online catalog (under "purchase") - it's all laid out very clearly (at least I hope so), so no guessing is required.

Finally, this is a really healthy discussion. We have done our best to produce a great quality adapter targeted at a specific price point. We are not trying to compete with the mini35; we are simply providing another option at a radically lower price point. We have focused on delivering those critical elements that deliver the image. It doesn't have every bell and whistle the mini35 does (most obviously the flipped-image), but at $500 it's not supposed to (the micro35 Pro will have more of the higher end options, but also at a higher price point).


Our goal is simply to provide another tool for digital filmmakers in our toolkit to achieve our desired look (which often equates to "that film look") without having to spend a bundle, or 3x what we paid for our camera. Like 24p, cinegamma, 16:9, etc. it is not a silver bullet, and isn't going to suddenly make us all Spielbergs. We do believe it is one of the more important bridges between "that film look" and DV/ HD.


Brian
 
bvalente said:
We do believe it is one of the more important bridges between "that film look" and DV/ HD.
Click to expand...
Completely agreed. Next to 24P, the mini35-style devices do more for making video look like film than anything else. The combination of a mini35 and 24p makes for a very, very convincing simulation of film.
 
Chapman said:
Whith the Micro35, you still need a 35 lense right? How much do those cost?
Click to expand...
You ask a question that many folks ask and there isn't really a cut-and-dry answer for you. There are many analogies to illustrate the vast range of lens prices and features. Most importantly what you need to decide is what are your needs for the adapter and what focal lengths are most useful for you and what you do. If you're not sure, then I'd recommend getting ahold of a 35mm slr camera and experiment with some lenses at the photo store. Get a "feel" for what focal length is "wide angle" and "medum" or "telephoto" for 35mm slr then you'll at least have a starting point to go from. Your question screams "I want the look of film, but I know very little about lenses" and that's okay. Really, it's great that you're hearing the "buzz" about "depth of field" and want to "get in" on the new tools available. That's great.. But, this is just one of those things you have to experience and use to know what works for you.

Some general guidelines:
Lenses from 24mm to 135mm are the most useful and most common.
The faster the lens, the better. f/1.4 is "top shelf" f/4 is "bottom shelf"
50mm f/1.8 is a good, basic affordable lens that does many things well.

You'll probably need to spend at least $100 on a single basic lens to get started.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
 
Interesting Brian. I have shot a lot of film, but I do not know sh*t about still cameras. I love this adaptor. Of the SLR mounts, Canon EOS, Canon FD or Nikon F, which one would offer the widest varity, and highest quality lenses?
 
Walter_Graff said:
but now that you've opened up the can of worms I can tell you that an adaptor with a quality lens placed on an XL2 blows away any picture one could ever make with a DVX100.
Click to expand...
The first report I ever made on the XL2 was that it should be the "ultimate mini35 camera". I don't know about "blows away", but a mini35 on an XL2 should deliver a sharper image, especially in 16:9 mode, than a mini35 on the DVX. I found the DVX/mini35 was definitely sharper than the XL1/mini35, so I'd expect the improvements in the XL2 to reverse that.

However, that's totally irrelevant when we're talking about the indie-priced adapters, like the G35 and the Micro35. Those cannot be used on the XL2 directly. Only the $10,000 mini35 can be used with the XL2, because of the relay lens situation -- no homemade or low-cost adapter is going to come with a high-quality relay lens. So no XL2 (or JVC HD100) is going to be able to use a low-cost adapter.

The actual $10,000 P&S Technik mini35, yes. But the $500 to $1000 micro35 or Guerilla35, no. The only way the XL2 could use one of those would be to attach it to the front of the XL2's lens, which totally gives back all the XL2's advantage, and puts it squarely back on par with the DVX.
 
Of the SLR mounts, Canon EOS, Canon FD or Nikon F, which one would offer the widest varity, and highest quality lenses?
Click to expand...

If you want the most flexibility in lens choice I would suggest Nikon lenses. The mount has (essentially) stayed the same for MANY years now so there is a great selection of older manual focus lenses. Canon has the propensity to change mount styles with different cameras (over the years) so the selection for any given mount is smaller. It beats me why.
 
No, because I don't believe either product is actually shipping yet. I believe M35 is now accepting orders, but may not have deliverable product for a few more weeks (although, there are probably some homebuilt ones out there now, made from the M35 guide). The G35 is not available yet.
 
Hey all,

There are some really good threads in the original micro35 discussion (now read-only, but accessible from the Alternative Imaging forum) on choosing 35mm lenses. There is also a healthy discussion on our forum at redrockmicro.com/forum.

The micro35 is taking orders - we are shipping starting early July.

Thanks

Brian
 
Brian,

Have you guys given any thought to creating a relay lens system for the XL2 and if so, what would be the cost? If not, would you consider making a one-off?

Matt
 
bvalente said:
It doesn't have every bell and whistle the mini35 does (most obviously the flipped-image), but at $500 it's not supposed to (the micro35 Pro will have more of the higher end options, but also at a higher price point).




Brian
Click to expand...

Interesting...in that original thread, Redrock specifically posted pictures of his rig with a correctly flipped image in the DVX LCD. I take it this was abondoned for the lower priced Micro35?
 
what is it that makes the P+S Technik Adapter like $7000 and this product little over $1200??

To me that either says, P+S Technik is a) an overpriced piece of equipment or b) there is someting far superior about it..

any insights? I was looking into renting that adapter for my short film.. but the price is just far too ridiculous to even think about..

The redrockmicro site was recommended to me by a fellow at DVShop (up here in the great white north).... I am interested in this product for sure, since I have access to 35mm motion picture prime lenses..

this product is either cheap and not as good.. or just a great deal... I dunno which...
 
Loki said:
what is it that makes the P+S Technik Adapter like $7000 and this product little over $1200??
Click to expand...
Accurate pricing:
P+S Technik Mini35 Adapter Only - $7445
P+S Technik Camera Adapter (Req'd.) - $2500
P+S Technik Lens Mount (Req'd.) - $375, Nikon or Canon

It's upwards of $11,000.00 all required accessories considered.

The Micro35 pricing is:
Redrock Micro35 Adapter Only - $500
Redrock Rails Support (*) - $350 (These rails are not required, but you do need rails)
Redrock Lens Mount (Req'd) - $75, Nikon or Canon

The only fundamental differences are the Redrock version is not "flipped" like the P+S Technik model and the Redrock version doesn't have an ND Filter Wheel, which is only necessary when used as a replacement lens for a XL1/2 camera. It offers zero benefit when used with a DVX100. We'll assume the optical quality is actually better than the P+S Technik model since there aren't any "flip" optics inside.. It should result in the same or better image quality, all other components being of similar make.

Loki said:
To me that either says, P+S Technik is a) an overpriced piece of equipment or b) there is someting far superior about it..

or just a great deal... I dunno which...
Click to expand...
They invented it. When you're the only player in the market, you make the rules.
Now, there's more than one player in the market so things are more competitive.

I would expect P+S Technik to actually raise their prices, not lower them.
They have a long held reputation with cinematographers dating back to over 15 years ago. They are mostly former Arriflex employees and are a top notch company with top notch equipment and services. They aren't in direct competition with any of the other lesser priced varieties of lens adapter. I would suspect the Micro35 to be kickin awesome and give filmmakers one more tool they can use for making movies... Something that otherwise, as you've said Loki, would be financially "out of reach"

Hope this helps.
-B
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top