"Cinemized" by Zacuto

Yves Simard said:
Sorry I am new to this forum, so pardon the ignorance as I have not shot a lot with small format cameras. Did people do this with other handycam type cameras like the 202? I just have never seen these types of rigs before the DSLR and thought people liked the using the handgrip and stock viewfinder. I guess its an issue with now the heavy glass. I am just asking..
Click to expand...

This stems from the DSLRs being "cinema" cameras. Which means shooting short takes, set settings and a crew to run the camera/focus etc... Also the DSLRs have virtually no handheld ergonomics. I don't think you would find an event or video person shooting with that two handed contraption because you can't change anything on the camera unless you use auto everything or have a lot of remote controls. I use a homemade version of the one handed model Jan was using with a rear zoom controller.
 
Operating any camera at eye level that isn't already in the shoulder form-factor can be a very fatiguing experience for the operator. In work where you're handheld all day, these rigs (or countless derivations thereof) are commonplace. We use a carbon fibre 15mm rods rig with handgrips on every camera we have. Of course, then you're moving to a conventional follow-focus instead of using the barrel and a Microforce for zoom (or other) and on and on.
 
Bassman2003 said:
I don't think you would find an event or video person shooting with that two handed contraption because you can't change anything on the camera unless you use auto everything or have a lot of remote controls.
Click to expand...

That "two handed contraption" is pretty similar to the traditional shoulder rig. And actually, from what I've seen, coverage of major events such as concerts that are shot on larger digicine cameras (F900, RED, etc.) make exclusive use of the two-handed rigs because they allow a lot of stability when you need it, but you don't have to have two hands on all the time - I can take my left hand off and adjust aperture, use the FF, etc.

The shoulder rig setup, as mentioned in the Zacuto video, also allows the camera and equipment to rest almost balanced on the shoulders, rather than sitting out in front with its weight supported almost entirely by the arms. A properly equipped shoulder rig should require almost no effort from the operator to hold level - ideally, you should be able to let go with both hands and have the camera remain on the shoulder while remaining roughly parallel with the ground. If you have to film for more than a few minutes, a shoulder rig makes life much much easier.

This may, of course, simply be a by-product of the larger size and weight of production/broadcast cameras, but there is a lot to be said for the ergonomics of that specific piece of equipment.
 
Yves Simard said:
Did people do this with other handycam type cameras like the 202? I just have never seen these types of rigs before the DSLR and thought people liked the using the handgrip and stock viewfinder. I guess its an issue with now the heavy glass. I am just asking..
Click to expand...

For most compact professional cameras, shoulder-mounted rigs are the way to go if you want true ergonomic stability. Most of the people I work with (in a lower-budget field) don't use them. If you want better comfort, quality and control in your work for pulling focus and manipulating the camera's switches, shoulder-mounted rigs are the way to go.

I agree, however, that adding the viewfinder -- while more conveniently place than the built-in one -- is kind of a waste of money.
 
I bought what seems to be a really nice mattebox/rail system at a very reasonable price... check it out... Cine City in India... http://www.thecinecity.com/eshop/pro...cat=270&page=1
Click to expand...

Hope you like it. I have the same rail system from India and I would NOT recommend it unless you cannot afford anything else. Quality is cheap and I don't like the way the rail system works. Not easily configurable to other setups. Also, it's way heavier than my Letus rail system.
 
Bassman... I know about the DSLRs - very well in fact and hand held rigs etc..

My question is did people do this with 202s and other small formats?.. because the AF-100 is just a 202 (body wise) in fact its lighter.

I have never seen a 202 in a gunslinger rig.
 
trez said:
If I were one of those guys able to throw it over their shoulder, I'd consider it... :)
Click to expand...

All I can say is I was thankful when those lowered urinals started appearing.

Seriously, am curious to see how well the AF100 works with the Zacuto Tactical Shooter. The in-line VF should be good there. Would imagine weight would start to take a toll after awhile. Still, with the handle and side grip removed and a light lens it may not be too bad.
 
Yves Simard said:
Bassman... I know about the DSLRs - very well in fact and hand held rigs etc..

My question is did people do this with 202s and other small formats?.. because the AF-100 is just a 202 (body wise) in fact its lighter.

I have never seen a 202 in a gunslinger rig.
Click to expand...

I think they just put the camera in a gun slinger just to show something and keep Zacuto in the minds of everyone...I bet they will come out with something new.

I mounted my HVX on my gun slinger just like they did on this video...It did not feel comfortable to me...unnatural too...for a DSLR works awesome...for a cam like the HVX...hmmm thats a stretch.
 
Though I've never used any of their products (I hear they may be good though they look a bit ghetto IMHO) I would never buy any after watching the "Great dSLR Shootout". The take home message was dSLRs were in most instances as good if not better than film or at least pretty damn close. Never, though did Zacuto point out out any of the dSLRs inherent weaknesses anywhere in the piece. That seems irresponsible.

I feel it was very poor short sided infomercial marketing that I'm sure convinced many to buy dSLRs and of course Zacuto products to match but makes me never want to support the company.
 
Yves Simard said:
Bassman... I know about the DSLRs - very well in fact and hand held rigs etc..

My question is did people do this with 202s and other small formats?.. because the AF-100 is just a 202 (body wise) in fact its lighter.

I have never seen a 202 in a gunslinger rig.
Click to expand...

I guess my point was that the DSLRs do not offer a good ability to handhold as opposed to the HVX which has all you need built in. The answer would be in my opinion people do not use these types of rigs with an HVX because they do not have to.

Granted they are well built and do probably make a world of difference like a large broadcast camera on your shoulder.
 
Yeah I have Zacuto gear for my DSLR - but I was curious to real world applications. Most environments I shoot in wouldn't really stand up to anything like that, but I can certainly appreciate the advantage in a controlled environment.

I was just curious because small cameras (DSLR exempt) in a mixed large format shoot, like most reality shows I work on are great because they are small. I was just amazed with the size.. is all.

I really like the cinema rig they set up, I think that is totally appropriate. Curious to hear all your thoughts.

When we ran the Zeiss glass on the 100, it was definitely front heavy, could have used a rod system but it was quite portable and easy to use. Any heavier glass, then the lens mount would susceptible to stress so perhaps this is where their system would come into its own.
 
Bassman2003 said:
I guess my point was that the DSLRs do not offer a good ability to handhold as opposed to the HVX which has all you need built in. The answer would be in my opinion people do not use these types of rigs with an HVX because they do not have to.

Granted they are well built and do probably make a world of difference like a large broadcast camera on your shoulder.
Click to expand...

A lot of these rigs became extremely popular during the DOF adapter wave. You had to mount the adapter to a rail system or it would rip off the end of your camera.

The practical application with more traditional cameras is modularity. Adding monitors, matteboxes, accessories, shoulder supports, etc.
 
I built a rig like this - well, better than this actually - for my HVX200 with parts I had from previous cameras. Because I wasn't able to locate an external finder, I used a Hoodman loop on the LCD, which works pretty well - but is not perfect because it isn't forward enough, as I mention below.

Zacutto makes great stuff, pricey but well built - "elegant" as a machinist friend of mine would say. However, as shown in the video, many "designers" are completely unaware of the needs of working documentarians (or camera operators) who often handhold all day without an AC.

YES to the side finder and rear mounted battery (I use an Elipse that came as a bonus when I bought my 200 from Abels), but NO to the extensions (silly long handles and extremely long battery mount). Simply having to set the camera down on a table or on the floor, moving through a small door, or getting quickly in and out of a car, would be very awkward with that setup.

The viewfinder should be farther forward (look at an Aaton Minima, for instance) so the camera sits back on your shoulder, then the battery wouldn't have to extend so far - and the grip (you really only need one on the right) should be just below the rails. That way, the lens' focus ring is just in front of your cheek, which means you can hold your arms steadily in close to your body. And the whole thing's smaller so you dan't have to assemble and dis-assemble every time you move locations.

Admittedly, all of those things are adjustable with the tools shown. Configured correctly, this could be a great way to go.
 
Have they posted prices for those gizmos yet? I betting a fully pimped out Zacuto rig with EFV and all would set you back just a tad under $4k. Is that about right?
 
David G. Smith said:
Have they posted prices for those gizmos yet? I betting a fully pimped out Zacuto rig with EFV and all would set you back just a tad under $4k. Is that about right?
Click to expand...

The "Double Barrel" is a similar kit.

LINK: ZACUTO DOUBLE BARREL KIT >>

Z-DDB.jpg


Kit Includes:
DSLR Baseplate
Zgrips V3
Z-mount
Pair of 12" rods
Minimount
Shoulder pad
Z-Lite double
DSLR Handle
Z-Finder Pro 2.5x
Z-Focus
Zipgear prime lens kit
(4)3.5" M/F Rods
(2)4.5" F/F Rods

--

So, give and take a few items (get rid of DSLR baseplate, add AF-100 baseplate; get rid of weights, add battery mount and batteries, etc.) it would be "about $4000.00" I think. May we be surprised.
 
I completely disagee

I completely disagee

Steve Kahn said:
Though I've never used any of their products (I hear they may be good though they look a bit ghetto IMHO) I would never buy any after watching the "Great dSLR Shootout". The take home message was dSLRs were in most instances as good if not better than film or at least pretty damn close. Never, though did Zacuto point out out any of the dSLRs inherent weaknesses anywhere in the piece. That seems irresponsible.

I feel it was very poor short sided infomercial marketing that I'm sure convinced many to buy dSLRs and of course Zacuto products to match but makes me never want to support the company.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I completely disagree. I don't think you watched all three parts to the DSLR shootout. The actual take away was that Film looked better, had better latitude, had better blow up capacity, had better lens choices, was better in every way to DSLRs except that DSLR's are way more light sensitive and had less apparent grain/noise.

The question posed was that DSLR's for the money looked amazing (were close to film in some respects) and were more then adequate for most people uses and budgets. But both Jens and I said that if we had the money to shoot our feature on film vs. DSLR we'd still opt for film if we had the budget to do so. If not then DSLR was a great option. Please go back and watch to get the real story.

Steve
 
zacuto said:
Sorry, I completely disagree. I don't think you watched all three parts to the DSLR shootout. The actual take away was that Film looked better, had better latitude, had better blow up capacity, had better lens choices, was better in every way to DSLRs except that DSLR's are way more light sensitive and had less apparent grain/noise.

The question posed was that DSLR's for the money looked amazing (were close to film in some respects) and were more then adequate for most people uses and budgets. But both Jens and I said that if we had the money to shoot our feature on film vs. DSLR we'd still opt for film if we had the budget to do so. If not then DSLR was a great option. Please go back and watch to get the real story.

Steve
Click to expand...
why didn't you guys test Red One at the shootout? That's the real test we all wanted to see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top