Capt Quirk
Veteran
What I don't understand, is why that guy has half a horse running as his avatar, but my gif- I mean Akube's gif- doesn't work. But, like I said, it gets the point across 
guess what i found..
- Thread starter Akube
- Start date
mike the beginner
Well-known member
What direction will cameras manufacturers look towards with regard auto features in the future. Digital DSLRs cameras appear to have moved towards more accurate and faster auto features and some attempt at face recognition. They are also keen to ensure that full manual facilities are available as well in the same cameras. Perhaps their next stage will be proper video recording to make them become ENG capable!!! who knows?
New ENG HD lenses such as the Fujinon b4 2/3rds HD lenses are now being made to include pre-set programs within their lens etc (if i have read correctly?) the development is certainly not moving away from auto features but blending these new features with full manual controls as well. The price of such lenses are not cheap but they must be pretty certain of worthwhile sales otherwise why make them.
I applaud red for trying to come up with something that might well be better at manual focusing (focus assist) than anything out there to date. They are providing us with a HD LCD and an optional HD EVF to help in making focusing more accurate. If we can get the record button on the red rail handle so it can (as someone cleverly suggested) be operated by your right thumb, it will also make the red one possibly the best fully manual camera on the market?
I think "others" are going to be rather shaken when the red cine and red flash gets the grilling by those selected by red to test the cameras out. When p2 was introduced in the HVX 200, was there not a lot of problems in trying to get workflow sorted? Just guessing, but i reckon red are going to shock everyone by the speed and ability of red cine/red flash to deliver the best new form of workflow from a tapeless camera.
The red flash if priced really cheap could have a large impact on the new panasonics with p2 ready for release.
Whatever the future developments in other cameras i just hope team red will have put enough oversight into the camera that will allow future possible features to be added and allow red one to survive long term and not be superseeded by red two.
PS: Capt Quirk, the horse is more human than the computer ha ha
Michael
New ENG HD lenses such as the Fujinon b4 2/3rds HD lenses are now being made to include pre-set programs within their lens etc (if i have read correctly?) the development is certainly not moving away from auto features but blending these new features with full manual controls as well. The price of such lenses are not cheap but they must be pretty certain of worthwhile sales otherwise why make them.
I applaud red for trying to come up with something that might well be better at manual focusing (focus assist) than anything out there to date. They are providing us with a HD LCD and an optional HD EVF to help in making focusing more accurate. If we can get the record button on the red rail handle so it can (as someone cleverly suggested) be operated by your right thumb, it will also make the red one possibly the best fully manual camera on the market?
I think "others" are going to be rather shaken when the red cine and red flash gets the grilling by those selected by red to test the cameras out. When p2 was introduced in the HVX 200, was there not a lot of problems in trying to get workflow sorted? Just guessing, but i reckon red are going to shock everyone by the speed and ability of red cine/red flash to deliver the best new form of workflow from a tapeless camera.
The red flash if priced really cheap could have a large impact on the new panasonics with p2 ready for release.
Whatever the future developments in other cameras i just hope team red will have put enough oversight into the camera that will allow future possible features to be added and allow red one to survive long term and not be superseeded by red two.
PS: Capt Quirk, the horse is more human than the computer ha ha
Michael
Last edited:
Follow Focus with EF Lenses
Follow Focus with EF Lenses
This post caught my attention, because it resulted in approximately ten times as many hits to our website over the past week, as a typical post in a professional, or prosumer, video or photography site does. Given that more than one of the posters is a DP, my curiosity was piqued. I work for Birger Engineering, the company that developed the device Akube mentioned in his post.
We do hear from DPs on a semi-regular basis regarding the possibility of using our EF232 product for follow focus. It would be possible to do this. Smooth focusing, either following a knob in a servo loop, or mark to mark over a fixed time interval, are all very reasonable things to accomplish. In dynamic usage we can control the iris to 1/4 stop (which may or may not be smooth enough if the iris is to be adjusted during a shot). The 1/2 step limitation in our current product is a software limitation that we have imposed, because it offers better behavior in many of our static applications.
Our device was first devloped for static applications - which like typical SLR camera usage is (1) set up for shot, (2) take shot (3) repeat. We have many users in the studio world, but most are industrial and scientific users for whom this was the desirable mode of operation.
SLR cameras do have a Servo mode for the following of a moving object while a series of images are taken. The lenses are designed for this sort of usage. As such, we could with a reasonable amount of effort optimize our unit for dynamic usage, such as that in the production of motion images. The issue for us has been identifying the feature set and the ergonomics of the hand controller that would integrate with our existing unit. If the features were limited to a handful of buttons, a knob, a small display and a power source, Akube's speculation of a $1250 system is not unreasonable.
The second issue for us is the marketplace. There are two basic issues. The first DPs (and this goes for most artists as well) are very demanding customers. We will not release such a product if we do not feel that it is a smooth extension of the artist. The risks are simply too great, that a few initial bad resoponses will forever color the opinion of the marketplace.
We would love to develop such a product, but would require an intial marketplace comitment of approximately 20 units for it to escalate above our current set of development priorities. This is the second marketplace issue - we are busy enough that we do not have the time to take on speculative prjects. This does not mean that this might not escalate in priority at some point in the future. Some of our industrial customers might even find a hand controller appealing.
So, I offer this to the group, and trust the moderators to set up the appropriate forum, if it seems a good idea. I am happy to entertain a conversation as to what sort of features are desired in such unit.
For the conversation, let's use $1500 as the price point. I set this here, as adding to this price that of the rental of a Canon lens for a week, one is still below the cost of renting a Cooke Prime for a week. I do not make quality judgements except to say one is able to get a Canon lens producing approximately the same "look" or DOF. This is also one half to one quarter the cost of purchasing a typical follow focus setup.
The mechanical considerations are not that significant. A PL mount has a greater back focal length than a Canon lens, even before our adapter is attached. But most modern day digital cameras that do not have a through the lens viewer (or mechanical shutter) are constructed in such a way that the existing lens mount can be removed, and our lens mount put in its place. THis also goes for the Redrock and Pro35 adapters.
Among other things on our current engineering priority list is the release of a FourThirds compatible version of our product, which offers both faster and higher resolution lenses than many comparable focal length lenses in the Canon lineup. This should be available in February. By the end of 2007 we expect to support Nikon F and Sigma SA as well. Any of which would work with the same follow focus controller.
I appologize if I offended anyone with such a commercial post. It is my hope that in some way I have offered something to this community. It is up to the community if this conversation should continue.
Regards,
Erik.
---
Erik Widding
President
Birger Engineering, Inc.
(mail) 100 Boylston St #1070; Boston, MA 02116
(voice) 617.695.9233
(fax) 617.695.9234
(web) http://www.birger.com
Follow Focus with EF Lenses
Akube said:
This post caught my attention, because it resulted in approximately ten times as many hits to our website over the past week, as a typical post in a professional, or prosumer, video or photography site does. Given that more than one of the posters is a DP, my curiosity was piqued. I work for Birger Engineering, the company that developed the device Akube mentioned in his post.
We do hear from DPs on a semi-regular basis regarding the possibility of using our EF232 product for follow focus. It would be possible to do this. Smooth focusing, either following a knob in a servo loop, or mark to mark over a fixed time interval, are all very reasonable things to accomplish. In dynamic usage we can control the iris to 1/4 stop (which may or may not be smooth enough if the iris is to be adjusted during a shot). The 1/2 step limitation in our current product is a software limitation that we have imposed, because it offers better behavior in many of our static applications.
Our device was first devloped for static applications - which like typical SLR camera usage is (1) set up for shot, (2) take shot (3) repeat. We have many users in the studio world, but most are industrial and scientific users for whom this was the desirable mode of operation.
SLR cameras do have a Servo mode for the following of a moving object while a series of images are taken. The lenses are designed for this sort of usage. As such, we could with a reasonable amount of effort optimize our unit for dynamic usage, such as that in the production of motion images. The issue for us has been identifying the feature set and the ergonomics of the hand controller that would integrate with our existing unit. If the features were limited to a handful of buttons, a knob, a small display and a power source, Akube's speculation of a $1250 system is not unreasonable.
The second issue for us is the marketplace. There are two basic issues. The first DPs (and this goes for most artists as well) are very demanding customers. We will not release such a product if we do not feel that it is a smooth extension of the artist. The risks are simply too great, that a few initial bad resoponses will forever color the opinion of the marketplace.
We would love to develop such a product, but would require an intial marketplace comitment of approximately 20 units for it to escalate above our current set of development priorities. This is the second marketplace issue - we are busy enough that we do not have the time to take on speculative prjects. This does not mean that this might not escalate in priority at some point in the future. Some of our industrial customers might even find a hand controller appealing.
So, I offer this to the group, and trust the moderators to set up the appropriate forum, if it seems a good idea. I am happy to entertain a conversation as to what sort of features are desired in such unit.
For the conversation, let's use $1500 as the price point. I set this here, as adding to this price that of the rental of a Canon lens for a week, one is still below the cost of renting a Cooke Prime for a week. I do not make quality judgements except to say one is able to get a Canon lens producing approximately the same "look" or DOF. This is also one half to one quarter the cost of purchasing a typical follow focus setup.
The mechanical considerations are not that significant. A PL mount has a greater back focal length than a Canon lens, even before our adapter is attached. But most modern day digital cameras that do not have a through the lens viewer (or mechanical shutter) are constructed in such a way that the existing lens mount can be removed, and our lens mount put in its place. THis also goes for the Redrock and Pro35 adapters.
Among other things on our current engineering priority list is the release of a FourThirds compatible version of our product, which offers both faster and higher resolution lenses than many comparable focal length lenses in the Canon lineup. This should be available in February. By the end of 2007 we expect to support Nikon F and Sigma SA as well. Any of which would work with the same follow focus controller.
I appologize if I offended anyone with such a commercial post. It is my hope that in some way I have offered something to this community. It is up to the community if this conversation should continue.
Regards,
Erik.
---
Erik Widding
President
Birger Engineering, Inc.
(mail) 100 Boylston St #1070; Boston, MA 02116
(voice) 617.695.9233
(fax) 617.695.9234
(web) http://www.birger.com
Brook Willard
Well-known member
Hey, great post. I'm glad you came in to share this with us.
alacritymedia
Active member
I Like It
I Like It
First off I have no problem with a "commercial" post about developing a creative application of a technology that is of obvious interest to our group. When I look at the cost of PL mount glass vs the cost of lenses designed for still camera use that have similar resolution in terms of line pairs per mm I can't help but wonder if there is a way to make them work. Before anyone writes me off as an idiot I do not expect the same results as a high end purpose built lens like a Cooke but cost does matter. I think widding has put the ball in our court and depending on various issues yet to be determined I might want to take a swing. Seems a shame that my investment in Canon EOS lenses is so difficult to leverage into motion work.
Put me down as interested but not ready to put my cash where my mouth is until this conversation has evolved further.
Blair S. Paulsen
RedOne #19
I Like It
First off I have no problem with a "commercial" post about developing a creative application of a technology that is of obvious interest to our group. When I look at the cost of PL mount glass vs the cost of lenses designed for still camera use that have similar resolution in terms of line pairs per mm I can't help but wonder if there is a way to make them work. Before anyone writes me off as an idiot I do not expect the same results as a high end purpose built lens like a Cooke but cost does matter. I think widding has put the ball in our court and depending on various issues yet to be determined I might want to take a swing. Seems a shame that my investment in Canon EOS lenses is so difficult to leverage into motion work.
Put me down as interested but not ready to put my cash where my mouth is until this conversation has evolved further.
Blair S. Paulsen
RedOne #19
im.thatoneguy
Well-known member
No, developer input is always more than welcome. It takes out all of the guessing games and speculation. (The reason we have a RED forum at all 
)
Just to stave off the inevitable moderator post: Erik I don't think we're allowed to post commercial links in our sig unless we've bought advertising on DVXuser.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. I don't mind, but you might get asked to remove it. Jarred should be able to give you the official nod.
)Just to stave off the inevitable moderator post: Erik I don't think we're allowed to post commercial links in our sig unless we've bought advertising on DVXuser.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. I don't mind, but you might get asked to remove it. Jarred should be able to give you the official nod.
insanityfw
Ban Me Please!
I too am interested to hear more, but am curious as what the mods will say as well.
Thanks Erik for presenting the offer, no matter how it works out.
Thanks Erik for presenting the offer, no matter how it works out.
Muttondraw
Well-known member
Hi Eric. I am definitely interested at that price point.
Martin
Martin
Anders Holck
Well-known member
Eric, Maybe you should get in touch with Curt von Badinsk (CVB on this list)
He is working on a motion control rig and a sererate wireless wifi handunit.
If your solutions could interface together, you would get a much broader market.
He is working on a motion control rig and a sererate wireless wifi handunit.
If your solutions could interface together, you would get a much broader market.
evinsky
Well-known member
Erik, I think it's fine to respond to a genuine interest in an undeveloped product. As long as it doesn't escalate to a direct sales pitch. I'm sure many here would be interested in having an electronic solution to focus and exposure, and many would be willing to pay $1500 for it. Getting a commitment for 20 units may be tough though, at least on an as yet non-existent product. But Red has managed to gather over 1000 faith based reservations (Including myself) so you only have to capture 2% of the existing market to make your goal.
I for one would be happy to let you know how I think this product should perform.
A knob based, friction dampened focus control with an accurate and repeatable focus draw. A smooth, smaller knob for Iris control, a digital read out is fine for this since aperture changes on some zooms. The control box should be compact enough to fit on the rails like a normal followfocus. But should also have the ability to be remotely operated.
If IS/VR is available great, but it's better to get the focus/iris working smooth and seemlessly.
I for one would be happy to let you know how I think this product should perform.
A knob based, friction dampened focus control with an accurate and repeatable focus draw. A smooth, smaller knob for Iris control, a digital read out is fine for this since aperture changes on some zooms. The control box should be compact enough to fit on the rails like a normal followfocus. But should also have the ability to be remotely operated.
If IS/VR is available great, but it's better to get the focus/iris working smooth and seemlessly.
evinsky said:
Evinsky, thank you for weighing in on this. IS/VR is actually already working, and has been tested on a 4K camera based on the Panavision/SVI sensor.
We have been tossing around follow focus as a product extension the past two days. I am not promising anything, but it has escalated on our priority list. I see this task as being broken into three pieces:
(1) Optimization of our existing controller for dynamic applications, such as follow focus. We have already committed to existing customers to finish this, understand what is needed here, and this will be completed regardless of whether we actually produce a hand controller. It is important to note, all lenses are not created equally. Those Canon lenses with Ring-type USM motors work best, most "L" lenses have this. All irises are pretty much the same.
(2) Mechanical interface to the camera for the existing lens mount. This can be left until the end. Depending on the camera may be best suited to be done by that manufacturer, us, the owner, or a third party.
(3) A hand controller, that is rail mounted on the camera or used remotely via cable or wireless.
I am interested in having a public conversation (and this forum's audience and comments to date makes it seem the proper location) as to what (3) should entail. I can not make any commitments when or if we will choose to release this product. But I can tell you, this product will only be interesting if it works the way a DP wants it to, rather than how this engineer thinks a DP thinks it should.
The feedback that I have received from a number of DPs has been good enough to give us a concept of what we want to build. The hand controller will have the following:
big knob for focus
small kob for iris
bluetooth radio
display
other buttons/switches (very few!)
battery
mounting features for rails on camera
easily handheld off camera
durable
cost reduced without sacrificing utility/durability
We have taken this to mean a couple of things:
The housing is going to be polycarbonate, rather than metal. Mounting to the rails should be with thumb screws rather than tools. The mounting hardware should be removable if it interferes with the ergonomic handheld use, but all hardware should be captive so it does not get lost.
If two hand controllers are used in a system, the one mounted on the camera can be a slave (mainly providing a radio receiver, and power to the lens), and the second one can talk to it wirelessly as the master. Both displays would be syncronised. The bluetooth interface would allow for: control from a computer/PDA (SPP profile) and/or integration into a larger motion control system; upgrading the software; customizing/calibrating/etc. Basically the desire to keep the unit inexpensive means it needs to have a simple user interface.
Anything beyond the actual use of the lens, and the most basic changing of modes, should be handled from the external PDA/computer talking over bluetooth. We can recognize a unique lens model (but not a unique lens) over the interface, so it would be easy for the follow focus unit to remember any calibrations, i.e. lens step to distance, knob/lens rotation mapping (possibly non-linear, user customized shape), and automatically adjust when a lens is replaced. The unique lens/model is not a problem in single camera setups.
Buttons/knobs/display beyond the minimum is going to both add cost, and clutter that will make this less user friendly. But in a menu mode, the two knobs could be available for navigation, so the interface might not have to be too limited.
We can make the unit smaller than it needs to be, so I would ask a few ergonomics questions: How big (assuming substantially a rectangular solid) is a good size? How big (diameter and thickness) of each of the knobs to be really usable? Does tension of these knobs need to be adjustable? or is something just tighter than "they won't turn on their own" good enough? How far apart should these knobs be?
The lenses do not have absolute encoders, but with some precaution in the implementation of a system, are extremely repeatable (assuming ring USM motors). A homing operation will always be required when the unit is powered up, or a lens is replaced. This is just one of the limitations of using SLR lenses.
For the knobs, incremental encoders are the cheapest/easiest to integrate - these do not have any type of home reference. Stepping up from there are encoders that can have absolute orientation known by rotating them once through after powering up. Is absolute and deterministic orientation of the knobs from powerup to powerup a value add or not? Or is a homing of the knobs, along with a homing of the lens good enough?
Should the range of rotation of the knob relative to the entire range of focus always be the same, or should the mapping of rotation be user configurable, and potentially non-linear. Should the rotation of the knob be linear in distance or linear in angular rotation of the lens mechanism? Is there a need for multiple rotations of the knob to map to the range of focus (i.e. very fine focus mode)?
How much data should be on the display? Is min/max/current f-number, focus count, and distance of focus (if available/calibrated) enough? Is a 12 character by 3 line display, cell phone sized characters, good enough? If not, how many lines/characters?
What I am asking for is help to get from a rough idea, to a product specification. We have been procrastinating entering this market, in no small part because we do not know exactly what this follow focus control should look like.
I am impressed by the excitement that you all have for Red. It is your camera, and it will meet your needs, because you have been involved in its development. If a good specification for a follow focus controller can be developed, that will meet the needs of DPs - I will allow faith, rather than guaranteed orders, be my guide in prioritizing.
Gauntlet has been laid down: Help me navigate to a meaningful product specification, and we may build it.
[Moderator, should this conversation be moved somewhere else?]
Regards,
Erik Widding
Birger Engineering
evinsky
Well-known member
widding said:
I think it's a good place at this point in the development. I think we all understand these things are works in progress but if you keep an open dialog (like Red has) you will find and egar and loyal customer base awaits.
widding said:
This all sounds good as long as the Bluetooth range is sufficient. I would also like a wired backup option incase there is too much RF interferance (Wireless Mics, Video) to get reliable wi-fi control.
widding said:
Again, great, as long as Bluetooth works reliably from 25' away. My headset certainly dosen't.
widding said:
Great so far.
widding said:
These are the factors that really will make or break this product in my opinion. The knob should be adjustable for all types of lenses. The focus precision and turn radius is different for each. But they should be auto mapped for each focal length or zoom range so you don't have to worry about it when you swap lenses. I would highly recomend renting a film camera package with some lenses and a real Arri studio follow focus and have your engineers feel the direct relationship between the focus and gears. The 12x3 display should be fine, but needs to be visable in direct sunlight as well as backlit for night.
widding said:
I'd also like to see the Nikon AFS/VR version of this product available, although there will be mechanical only support for these initially anyway, but having both manufactures lens lines open to us will be a real boon.
Milan Nikolic
Member
I second that on need for Nikon lenses as well!
Hi there...
we had the same problems in controlling the focus with the steadycam use since we had the redrockMicro 35mm adapter. As all the trials to build a wireless remote controls are always delaying and delaying in time, we tried to find a solution by ourselves for the focus control problem.
By now, we are building a low cost mechanical wireless focus control, and our target price would be around a thousand euro depending on some facts to come yet. Although this solution is not as complete as the one Erik from Birger is offering, i thought it could be interesting for some. Iris control could be an option in the future.
The features will be:
15mm rods support
interchangeable gears
hard stops
easy calibration, but not automatic like cmotion
wide wireless range
confortable/ergonomic knob
If you want to collaborate/discuss/ask or just know a little bit more, post us your questions/comments at remotefollowfocus at gmail dot com
Update 28 december 2006. We uploaded a site with all the info about the project:
http://remotefollowfocus.googlepages.com/
Update 5 february 2006. We set up a waiting list for our Remote follow focus device:
http://www.foveas.com/forum/
Greetings!
Diego Gálvez
we had the same problems in controlling the focus with the steadycam use since we had the redrockMicro 35mm adapter. As all the trials to build a wireless remote controls are always delaying and delaying in time, we tried to find a solution by ourselves for the focus control problem.
By now, we are building a low cost mechanical wireless focus control, and our target price would be around a thousand euro depending on some facts to come yet. Although this solution is not as complete as the one Erik from Birger is offering, i thought it could be interesting for some. Iris control could be an option in the future.
The features will be:
15mm rods support
interchangeable gears
hard stops
easy calibration, but not automatic like cmotion
wide wireless range
confortable/ergonomic knob
If you want to collaborate/discuss/ask or just know a little bit more, post us your questions/comments at remotefollowfocus at gmail dot com
Update 28 december 2006. We uploaded a site with all the info about the project:
http://remotefollowfocus.googlepages.com/
Update 5 february 2006. We set up a waiting list for our Remote follow focus device:
http://www.foveas.com/forum/
Greetings!
Diego Gálvez
Last edited: