Are adaptors obsolete?

i know people will hate this but why don't letus or shoot35 make plastic housed adapters? Aluminium is good but theres glass in there so if you drop it, either way, your screwed. It should also bring costs down.
This is just because my xha1 with the sgblade on it becomes so god damn front heavy. That's my only reason to want to go to a 7d, hand held even with a shoulder mount is a ***** with a 35mm rig.
 
bimdas said:
hand held even with a shoulder mount is a ***** with a 35mm rig.
Click to expand...

With a properly equipped, balanced, and padded rig there shouldn't be any problems....yeah it's not fun if you're shooting for 8 hours straight on a doc, but evn then it's just a good burn:violent5:

But I do feel you, and see a place for the handhelds, but personally I want the extra mass and volume of a full rig...the moment cameras weigh 1/4 pound will be the day I add weights to it.
 
Nick Walters said:
But I do feel you, and see a place for the handhelds, but personally I want the extra mass and volume of a full rig...the moment cameras weigh 1/4 pound will be the day I add weights to it.
Click to expand...

I agree I got a GH1 to complement my HMC/Blade rig and Now I'm trying to figur eout how to make it heavier.
 
Personally, i like the look of adapters, but i like the look of the 7D/ 5D MK. 2/ GH1 alot more.

Guess whats on my wish list? :D
 
As soon as Canon or somebody releases a Camera which runs with a proper Codec at 24-25 frames per second, the adaptors will be DEAD! I lost three days of filming dues to a defective Letus and one day due to a problem with GG focus adjustment or dust on the ground glass. These issues should not even come up in a professional production environment.
 
jacotte said:
As soon as Canon or somebody releases a Camera which runs with a proper Codec at 24-25 frames per second,
Click to expand...

That's a big question though. Canon could package its current 5D running 24/25 in a body that was every bit as easy to use as any video camera tomorrow. It may not be as easy as it sounds to improve on that codec.
Who knows how long that will take. Probably not in the next few months though.

Lenny
 
Let's face it...VDSLR's are still camera's first. The only person going the other direction is RED, and I'm guessing they'll be the ONLY manufacturer to go that way. Why do I say this? Jello...Jello, Jello, Jello.

Even with a decent codec, you'll still have jello...and you won't have higher frame rates then 24-25 either....these manufacturers want just enough speed in the sensor to do 720, maybe 1080, and past that they just want to play the megapixel game.

So until the general public starts saying "we don't care about the still function or price, give us video", everyone is stuck waiting...and waiting.

I could be wrong, and I could have a different opinion in an hour....but at this moment it seems quite clear that RED has a good sensor and electronic to control it, and everyone is thinking that is what is in, or will be in, their still camera.
 
One of my best clients just made the decision to stick with EX and the Letus until the DSLR's get up to speed. However they're also buying a 7D in the meantime.
 
The fact is most SLRs still shoot very compressed footage and still use the Jellolicious Cmos sensors, so right out of the gate the adapters paired with a good camera are going to be a huge step ahead. Throw in all the pro features like XLR inputs manual control and histograms and it leaves them in the dust. The other fact is clients don't want to see you show up on set with a 2K SLR. Personally I think the best thing about them is their Low ligt abilities. I've used the Mark II to shoot some shows and in a few other situations where even the Red couldn't make out much with the available light.
 
If Canon took its still cameras three step further they would have a mega hit which would wipe out the entire industry.

Just take the current still camera and add the following three steps:

1) 24 fr/sec XDCAM codec
2) XLR imputs
3) Shoulder mount.

BINGO!
 
I think the modular design RED using would have been a hit for canon.

One "Head" optimized for video, one for still. Audio module etc.
 
I'm not really sure we'll see the death of 35mm adapters yet. Yeah, they're bulky, add lots of weight in front of the cam, takes a bit of time to setup and might break more easily than a camcorder's internals (thats A LOT of disadvantages, I agree!), but they give lots of FLEXIBILITY, and IMHO that's something often overlooked. Not everyone likes shallow DoF on their shoot ; some of my clients are looking for shots where everything's sharp and crisply in focus. I sometimes get requests for deep DoF in cluttered rooms and a 1/3" camcorder can give that with no problems compared to full-frame imagers.

Also, I personnally find it easier adding up more lighting when using an adapter when I need shallow DoF than stopping-down to f/8 or f/11 on a 2/3" cam and adding much more lighting (and/or cranking up the gain) since 2/3" camcorders are bigger and bulkier in the first place. But that's just my taste. Different tools for different uses as lots of people always say here!

So, while many have their dream camera sporting 35mm imagers, mine doesn't because flexibility is something I'm always looking for and that what I have now. Will adapters will become a lot less popular? Highly probable, but I'm not sure they'll die if there are other people out there thinking like me.

Just my 2 cents.
 
jenningsp said:
is it me or has everyone gone blind....????

i'm finding the more diffused adapers (sgpro/bladeRR2/M2classic/g35) WAY WAY WAY more filmic than these VDSLR cams.

i'm staying away from all the techno spec advatages and disadvatages crap. i'm talking purely about the feeling you get from watching the footage.

anyone else getting this?
Click to expand...

While you may prefer the aesthetic of the diffused look, it is not always beneficial to the story telling. The diffused look is very vintage. Not exactly usable in every situation. But if you want that look, it is very easy and very cheap to get a filter for your VDLSR lens to get that diffused look you like. You'd still be saving money, and you'd have the best of both worlds.

The VDSLR's have a great look! The colors are more saturated and everything looks so clean! You could film a garbage heap and it'd look pretty. Since most productions are for the web or DVD or viewed on LCD tv's, the codec on these cameras fits in nicely.

The 35mm DOF adapter concept is dead. However, it will function for a few years while companies get the most out of us by spoon feeding technology to us.

The first company to make a sub $5k 1080p full frame camera body with a decent codec (and/or RAW) will make a killing. But they will also need to sell accessories, because who will need to buy another video camera after that???

Selah
 
jacotte said:
Well, regardless of zebra, XLR inputs, and all the extras, the Canon solution is a natural.

The 35 adaptor solution seems to come right out of a Jules Verne book.

The 35 adaptor solution is a quick and dirty pimped up solution. I just filmed 3 days with my Letus activated only to realize the ground glass wasn't vibrating correctly. Then I realized there was dust hidden somewhere in the mechanism and it's difficult and almost impossible to get rid of. I will say nothing about backfocus, ground glass focus, vignetting, etc...

The bottom line is the Canon solution is a picture quality natural. We are one heartbeat away from somebody releasing a viable 24fr/sec with audio solution. Even Letus is running for cover. Try to get any response from their Portland office. They practically do not exist. I predict 2 years from now you will not be able to get a single adaptor fixed anywhere and these things will be on Ebay by the hundreds.
Click to expand...

I have the 7D but still shoot on a SDX900, Varicam or EX3 with Letus adaptor when applicable. If you exclude the operational difficulties of the DSLR, the aliasing and moire is still way worse than a 35 adaptor system. But that will change I know. But not this month.
 
honestly, i think the one thing that's going to survive out of the adapter world are very well made b4 mounts. there will always be people who want to put ENG lenses on their cameras, may it be red, dslr's, and so on....
 
James0b57 said:
While you may prefer the aesthetic of the diffused look, it is not always beneficial to the story telling. The diffused look is very vintage. Not exactly usable in every situation. But if you want that look, it is very easy and very cheap to get a filter for your VDLSR lens to get that diffused look you like. You'd still be saving money, and you'd have the best of both worlds.
Click to expand...

By diffused he didn't mean the look you get using a diffusion filter. He was talking about how the 35mm adpaters that use a more diffused ground glass render a better filmic image.. like for example, Dillons work in this thread : http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=187839 , arguably rivals what you can get from any vdslr.
 
Last edited:
Yes. There is a few breaths of life left in there for the faster crop, but... jello is almost gone already, and hopefully the last few nails will be set with the next generation or two. Once we lose all major IQ issues... RIP adapters, you were fun, we will miss you.
 
As long as Sony, Panasonic and Canon continue to make pro-sumer high end video cameras under 10k with a built-in non removable lens, adapters will still exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top