Just got a new camera - Sony F35

[Guest]

The eye piece on my F35 is never close enough to the camera body for me.

About 7" in the closest position from the center of the lens/body. Does any one have an elegant fix to get the EVF closer to the body? Or is there reason for keeping the eye piece where it is? Does anyone else have a preference?

 

[keithlango]

When I had my F35 it had an Otto Nemenz EVF mount that was 4 way adjustable. Maybe poke around and see if somebody has one of those they'd be willing to part with. Other than that I'm not sure what else is possible that doesn't require extra hunks of inelegant metal bits to get that sideways adjustability range.

 

[rbirnbaum]

The eye piece on my F35 is never close enough to the camera body for me.

About 7" in the closest position from the center of the lens/body. Does any one have an elegant fix to get the EVF closer to the body? Or is there reason for keeping the eye piece where it is? Does anyone else have a preference?

View attachment 131559

The VF is great, the adjustability not. I have shot with it in that position and it has been fine, but unlike you, I feel the evf pushes my head too far back. The side separation is fine with me, but I don't really look to have my camera stuck to my head.

Apart from Otto Nemenz, there are Panasonic mounts that may help. I am receiving a new one I ordered yesterday. Will let you know. The seller has 2 more units for sale on ebay.

Check them out may work for you.

 

[Guest]

The VF is great, the adjustability not. I have shot with it in that position and it has been fine, but unlike you, I feel the evf pushes my head too far back. The side separation is fine with me, but I don't really look to have my camera stuck to my head.

Apart from Otto Nemenz, there are Panasonic mounts that may help. I am receiving a new one I ordered yesterday. Will let you know. The seller has 2 more units for sale on ebay.

Check them out may work for you.

Yes, with how light the back is, the whole thing is front heavy. I'd imaging with an SR recorder, the camera could sit farther forward, and the eye piece wouldn't be an issue, but the side thing puzzles me. Maybe to accommodate matte boxes or some lenses. Either way, very interested in what you are getting. Thank you!

 

[Aaveum]

The eye piece on my F35 is never close enough to the camera body for me.

About 7" in the closest position from the center of the lens/body. Does any one have an elegant fix to get the EVF closer to the body? Or is there reason for keeping the eye piece where it is? Does anyone else have a preference?

I think the easiest is to replace the viewfinder.

One of the weakest points with the F35 system in my opinion is the EVF. It's bulky, heavy and it's a broadcast viewfinder. The image is good and pretty accurate. But it's not made for a cinema workflow.

Several companies, such as Panavision and Otto have gotten around that by modifying it and making their own version of it. Instead of going through the trouble I just got rid of mine. Considering how much they are worth it's actually a good deal. With what you get for your used C30WR, you can buy another EVF which is better suited. Especially today with so many options on the market.

I like mounting my EVF at the rear of the camera for tripod operation for example, as well as other configurations which the stock Sony EVF is just not made for. Because it's bulky it also interferes with matte boxes and other accessories as well. Reason for the after thought upper mounting EVF bracket on the handle. But that makes it just too high for shoulder operation.

The problem is that Sony never bothered to develop a cine viewfinder for the F35 and just stuck one of their broadcast units in the kit.

So I sold mine and never miss it.

 

[Aaveum]

Yes, with how light the back is, the whole thing is front heavy. I'd imaging with an SR recorder, the camera could sit farther forward, and the eye piece wouldn't be an issue, but the side thing puzzles me. Maybe to accommodate matte boxes or some lenses. Either way, very interested in what you are getting. Thank you!

This is a big part of the reason I didn't go with a monitor recorder.

I have seen many complains here about the F35 being unbalanced on the shoulder. It's really not, if you use the "whole camera".

The camera was designed to be used with a docked recorder at the back. Using just the head is basically using only half of it. It will certainly change the dynamics of it.

My set up balances beautifully on the shoulder. It balances no worse than an Arricam LT. Very easy to get stable shots.

When you don't have a recorder on the back it will indeed become front heavy. If you then add weight and height to the top, such as by adding a 7Q and arm, you just contribute to the instability. Even if the recorder is not that heavy, you are still adding height and weight and shifting your center of gravity.

Back when you had to use the SRW-1 tape recorder it could be tough. But once Panavision and Sony came up with the SSR1 and the SR-R1 it all changed. Codex as well. It makes for a compact yet balanced system, among other advantages. This is my line of choice.

 

[dhessel]

This is a big part of the reason I didn't go with a monitor recorder.

I have seen many complains here about the F35 being unbalanced on the shoulder. It's really not, if you use the "whole camera".

The camera was designed to be used with a docked recorder at the back. Using just the head is basically using only half of it. It will certainly change the dynamics of it.

My set up balances beautifully on the shoulder. It balances no worse than an Arricam LT. Very easy to get stable shots.

When you don't have a recorder on the back it will indeed become front heavy. If you then add weight and height to the top, such as by adding a 7Q and arm, you just contribute to the instability. Even if the recorder is not that heavy, you are still adding height and weight and shifting your center of gravity.

Back when you had to use the SRW-1 tape recorder it could be tough. But once Panavision and Sony came up with the SSR1 and the SR-R1 it all changed. Codex as well. It makes for a compact yet balanced system, among other advantages. This is my line of choice.

This is very true, the camera was designed to have a massive heavy recorder on the back. I had a SRW-1 with the F35 and while it was heavy it balanced so much better and was much more comfortable shouldering with the SRW-1, even more than with the Codex. Using a 7Q was far more awkward.

 

[dhessel]

The eye piece on my F35 is never close enough to the camera body for me.

About 7" in the closest position from the center of the lens/body. Does any one have an elegant fix to get the EVF closer to the body? Or is there reason for keeping the eye piece where it is? Does anyone else have a preference?

View attachment 131559

I don't recall all the configurations but the viewfinder mount on the f35 can be adjusted, you may be able to rotate it or move it a little bit to get it a little closer to the camera. Right now it is rotated so the mount extends out away from the center of camera, you might be able to rotate it 180 degrees which would move the viewfinder in an inch or so.

Check out the mount location in this picture, the mount is pointed up where it looks like yours is pointing out to the left side of the camera. I believe the mount can be rotated to be up, down, right or left.
https://cvp.com/product/sony_f35

 

[Guest]

That Explains it! My camera has alternate piece that offsets the mount. (you can kinda see it in my picture previously). I'll look into getting a different mount. maybe even go top rails.

here is a close up of my offset mounting bracket:

 

[Guest]

Got the wooden camera VCT shoulder mount in this afternoon. Reduces the camera height by a touch over half an inch! from almost 3" to just under 2.5". Also, the 15mm rails work with the same adapter bracket used on the old Red Cinema camera easy riser, so the rods are up higher! pretty pleased.



(the angle I took these skews the measurements, it is actually a little more than 1/2" difference, which is more than I expected)


It matches the F35 aesthetic quite well. Or at least it doesn't fight the aesthetic. clean lines and no fancy colors. I am not a fan of the feel of wooden camera though. things feel slightly cheap. not as bad as small rig, but not as good as Arri or Vocas. But still quite happy. About an inch shorter than my first build.

 

[rbirnbaum]

I don't recall all the configurations but the viewfinder mount on the f35 can be adjusted, you may be able to rotate it or move it a little bit to get it a little closer to the camera. Right now it is rotated so the mount extends out away from the center of camera, you might be able to rotate it 180 degrees which would move the viewfinder in an inch or so.

Check out the mount location in this picture, the mount is pointed up where it looks like yours is pointing out to the left side of the camera. I believe the mount can be rotated to be up, down, right or left.
https://cvp.com/product/sony_f35

Totally missed that! Well spotted

 

[Guest]

This is a big part of the reason I didn't go with a monitor recorder.

I have seen many complains here about the F35 being unbalanced on the shoulder. It's really not, if you use the "whole camera".

The camera was designed to be used with a docked recorder at the back. Using just the head is basically using only half of it. It will certainly change the dynamics of it.

My set up balances beautifully on the shoulder. It balances no worse than an Arricam LT. Very easy to get stable shots.

When you don't have a recorder on the back it will indeed become front heavy. If you then add weight and height to the top, such as by adding a 7Q and arm, you just contribute to the instability. Even if the recorder is not that heavy, you are still adding height and weight and shifting your center of gravity.

Back when you had to use the SRW-1 tape recorder it could be tough. But once Panavision and Sony came up with the SSR1 and the SR-R1 it all changed. Codex as well. It makes for a compact yet balanced system, among other advantages. This is my line of choice.

That is great advice. I'll keep a look out for an "SR". My AJA and CF cards were free, and seemed like a good place to start. Do you shoot a lot of shoulder mount ?

 

[rbirnbaum]

That Explains it! My camera has alternate piece that offsets the mount. (you can kinda see it in my picture previously). I'll look into getting a different mount. maybe even go top rails.

here is a close up of my offset mounting bracket:
View attachment 131575

The advantage of this mount is that your C30xx doesn’t clash with the lens. The original mount was too close for a lot of lenses and needed up interfering w Tu the iris or focus ring.

 

[Guest]

I may keep it like that and it will help me stay away from shoulder mount.

When i did a test shoot with this camera, a director friend of mine, who is used to all the reds and mirrorless cameras and easy rigs kept asking for lower angle shots, which is fine, but sometimes directors like to gently push the handheld cameras looking for a frame, and that can throw me into awkward oositions. Fine if it were a stripped down red, but this camera is not as condusive tto bad habits.

This is a camera i was hoping to use a lot in handheld though, due to the inertia, so inevitably i’ll figure out a solution, but for now, i am happy to get better at sticking to sticks.

 

[Guest]

I think the easiest is to replace the viewfinder.

One of the weakest points with the F35 system in my opinion is the EVF. It's bulky, heavy and it's a broadcast viewfinder. The image is good and pretty accurate. But it's not made for a cinema workflow.

Several companies, such as Panavision and Otto have gotten around that by modifying it and making their own version of it. Instead of going through the trouble I just got rid of mine. Considering how much they are worth it's actually a good deal. With what you get for your used C30WR, you can buy another EVF which is better suited. Especially today with so many options on the market.

I like mounting my EVF at the rear of the camera for tripod operation for example, as well as other configurations which the stock Sony EVF is just not made for. Because it's bulky it also interferes with matte boxes and other accessories as well. Reason for the after thought upper mounting EVF bracket on the handle. But that makes it just too high for shoulder operation.

The problem is that Sony never bothered to develop a cine viewfinder for the F35 and just stuck one of their broadcast units in the kit.

So I sold mine and never miss it.

Very good point!

 

[Guest]

When I had my F35 it had an Otto Nemenz EVF mount that was 4 way adjustable. Maybe poke around and see if somebody has one of those they'd be willing to part with. Other than that I'm not sure what else is possible that doesn't require extra hunks of inelegant metal bits to get that sideways adjustability range.

I’ll keep an eye out for one. Claremont mods on mine are great, but seem suited for more formal industrial production.

 

[rbirnbaum]

Easy Rig? That's my next purchase. One of the Chinese models should do for me.

 

[Guest]

Easy Rig? That's my next purchase. One of the Chinese models should do for me.

Yeah, F35 easy rig seems a good fit. I am too tall for a lot of shoulder work with actors.

Can’t wait to hear about your EVF solution! Looking foward to that!

 

[rbirnbaum]

James, this finally arrived. And I love it. Damn Panavision makes some fine stuff. So 2 key things about the VF in this config.








THE GOOD:

1. The loope assembles on the parallel plane, so if you unmount it, you can use the monitor. Could be useful for some shots.

2. The loop offers approx 1.5 magnification compared to the Sony C30WR loope. Easier to focus and less tiring in the eye.

THE BAD:
The mount is a beast. Mine came incomplete, which is why I got the VF cheap. I think that even in its most complete form, it may be overkill and make the camera too front heavy.

NOW, to find a way to assemble it to the camera. Thinking this:

Anyone has another idea? Been looking around, but most of them go on rods for a top handle. I prefer to not mount to the top handle to make the whole rig less top plate dependent.

https://www.adorama.com/us%20%20%20%20928195.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwmufZBRBJEiwAPJ3LpjnhQXEsNBkAIQZUpWNHFTdAVB0yQp-YRSot-p2NTgQvBzIvtfDYbBoCnXMQAvD_BwE

 

[Guest]

I have one of those evf mounts if you need/want one i could sell you for cheaper than that.