Letus Ultimate - RELEASED!

Kholi said:
So you're saying you have absolutely zero expeirence with the Letus and it's PL mount, correct? Do you have a single post or have you heard of an experience with the PL mount has failed anyone by your common sense?
Click to expand...

Man, you really are defensive of this product. So much so that you can't even admit that a PL mount is more precise and secure than 4 set screws in a tube?

My comments are not exclusive to the Letus. Nor are they exclusive to the PL mount. I do not have to have 1st hand experience with the Letus Ultimate and their PL mount to know that a PL mount is more secure and precise than 4 set screws. I do not have to have 1st hand experience with the Letus Ultimate and their PL mount to know that an arri std mount is more secure and precise than 4 set screws. I do not have to have 1st hand experience with the Letus Ultimate and their PL mount to know that a c-mount is more precise and secure than 4 set screws.

This is true for ALL adapters that use set screws perpendicular to a metal tube to hold the lenses on. The difference is that this adapter is 4-times the price, is the "ultimate" and is supposedly professional equipment. For $4500 you should be getting a better, more precise and more secure way to attach lenses than one that is constructed with a tap and die set and 50-cents worth of Home depot merchandise.

If you want to insist that 4 set screws are as secure and precise as a PL mount, then there's no point debating this with you, because you're living in a world of fantasy.
 
Texanite said:
Man, you really are defensive of this product. So much so that you can't even admit that a PL mount is more precise and secure than 4 set screws in a tube?

My comments are not exclusive to the Letus. Nor are they exclusive to the PL mount. I do not have to have 1st hand experience with the Letus Ultimate and their PL mount to know that a PL mount is more secure and precise than 4 set screws. I do not have to have 1st hand experience with the Letus Ultimate and their PL mount to know that an arri std mount is more secure and precise than 4 set screws. I do not have to have 1st hand experience with the Letus Ultimate and their PL mount to know that a c-mount is more precise and secure than 4 set screws.

This is true for ALL adapters that use set screws perpendicular to a metal tube to hold the lenses on. The difference is that this adapter is 4-times the price, is the "ultimate" and is supposedly professional equipment. For $4500 you should be getting a better, more precise and more secure way to attach lenses than one that is constructed with a tap and die set and 50-cents worth of Home depot merchandise.

If you want to insist that 4 set screws are as secure and precise as a PL mount, then there's no point debating this with you, because you're living in a world of fantasy.
Click to expand...

I just asked you a question. Do you have any experience with the product and can you name any instances in the last seven to eight months when a PL Mount fastened in by Set Screws has failed anyone in the field?

Why is it such a hard question to answer? Although, I think the answer is clear: no, you have no experience with it. And, no, you can't point out a single time when the system has failed anyone.

Now, from someone who HAS owned the PL mount and HAS bought into what you deem a "flawed" system: Not once has it failed me. Not once have I had an issue with the mount being flush. Yes, as Waefre pointed out I do have to blow shavings out of the front tube because the set screws bite into the mount. It doesn't cause me any issues beyond that and I'm willing to bet I switch mounts more than anyone on these boards. Think I didn't get pissed off when my Letus Extreme died on me? Think I was ecstatic when I discovered (thanks to Leni) that I still had to do a compromise focus for better edge-to-edge sharpness until the Optimization kit came out?

Don't mistake me making it a point that you have no experience with the unit as protecting anyone but the people seeking out information. MuscProdGirl is a prime example in THIS very thread. Someone said "Adapters are gonna die" and now she's worried about adapters dying... BY CHRISTMAS.

Come on man.

Waefre has valid points, perhaps it could benefit from an extra strip of metal. I can see where he's coming from... as someone who's actually used the system.

This has NOTHING to do with insisting that 4 set screws are the BEST solution on the planet. It does have to do with the fact that the solution works and is solid as an interchangeable mount system. You're alluding to it not working but you have no experience with it. S'all I'm getting at.
 
Kholi said:
Why is it such a hard question to answer? Although, I think the answer is clear: no, you have no experience with it. And, no, you can't point out a single time when the system has failed anyone.
Click to expand...

I have not. And, as I said, this is not exclusive to the Letus and I don't have to have ever used a Letus Ultimate and their PL mount to know that a PL mount is more precise and more secure than 4-set screws.

I can't tell you more stories about C-mount lenses falling onto the floor than PL lenses falling onto the floor, but I can tell you that the PL mount is a better mounting system than the c-mount. I don't need stories of disaster to know that one thing is better than the other.

If you can't admit that a PL mount is a better mounting system than 4-set screws, then you're far too emotionally wrapped up in this product. There are MUCH better ways of attaching mounts to any adapter than set-screws and a professional $4500 piece of equipment should employ one of them
 
It's an interchangeable mounting system... if it was locked in I would expect it to be pinned down by screws and the like. It's not, it's an interchangeable mounting system. The RED PL Mount is technically more secure than the Letus PL mount... because it's fixed into the body and it takes a whole hell of a lot more to change out a lens mount than it does any of these adapters.

Comparing the two is effectively comparing apples to wigs. You should be comparing the RED's PL mount to a GENESIS PL mount. Not a Letus Interchangeable lens mounting system to a Genesis PL mount.
 
Hello everybody,

Can somebody explain to me what the variable speed of the ground glass is used for? More of the mechanics, how it varies from redrock which you can go f22 or 2000 shutter speed without changing the GG speed. What it adds to the equation.

Cheers,
 
Last edited:
TimurCivan said:
Are you guys kidding me?!

I swear im going to buy a HPX500/ Ultimate/Relay, and i will feel as though i got away with highway robbery considering the performance per dollar youre getting on that setup...
Click to expand...


Might be on another thread... have to go back to page one... look up the ultimate link... but there is a relay lens with this... so you can use it with the HPX 500...

Sucks with my luck it'll probably true and I missed the rebate... so there would have been close to the price of the letus...
:laugh:

Found my answer... relay coming soon....
 
Texanite has a very valid point that we already thought about. We thought of doing the positive lock (PL) to hold the mount. We could possibly do it for the Extreme, but we thought it would not be economical. We then thought about doing it for the Ultimate, but then we decided to do the back focus function, that made it almost impossible to do both at the same time and we decided to keep the back focus function. When we designed the 3 set screws (not 4, big difference), we also looked at how SRL/cinema lenses mount were bolted to the lens, we thought the weak point would be at the connection between the lens and the mount of that lens (meaning that if great force are applied to the lens, the mount of the lens would break before the 3 set screws comes off. Please see how the mount/flange are connected to the lens, usually by 3,4 small screws). With that said, we will continue to think of a way to improve the method to mount the lens mount. If at all possible, it would not be as easy to change the lens mount in the field as current method because we only have about 10mm in front of the back focus ring.

I hope answers some of your questions.

Thanks,

Hien
 
Hien, What do you think of a small piece of metal acting as a pressure plate between the screw and the mount. The pressure would be evenly distributed over a wider area making the mount more secure (more friction) while at the same time the mount is not damaged. It could be made of steel so that the screw doesn't dig into it either. With this system you would still have the advantages of the set screws but lose the less professional points.
 
Waefre,

Wow, that's exactly what I have in mind. We must make the piece with spring loaded of some sort and have that piece to grab into the current groove of the mount's base and act as the brake. We must study the force to get it out however. To be honest, the current solution may be more solid, but we will see if we can make this work and as solid as again, we only have 10mm to play with. Thanks for the suggestion.
 
My two cents on the "mount" wars. I have never lost a lens from the four set screws. I do find they sometimes shift alignment ever so slightly when tightening, leave metal flakes, and don't give me much confidence especially for hand held or car mount applications.

I think the screw shim idea but even more so Texanite's threaded "giant C mount" threaded barrel approach. It is even simpler and better. The last idea not thrown out there yet is the way my SG attaches their lens mounts. A machined plate with four holes in the plate that align with four threaded holes in the body for four theaded screws. No grinded bits of metal and everything is held by threads - which meant if impact were to pull on the lens mount it would probably tear apart the entire adaptor before pulling out the lens mount. Very solid indeed. The nikon lens mount itself had more to be desired (improved upon since). I dig the new beefier LEX nikon mount much more but I still find the set screws sketchy at best. I'm refraining from a quick purchase this time and waiting for the guinea pigs to roost and see what updates come down the line.

Perhaps if you go with the plate/metal shim method that waefre proposes how about a slight groove not even a millimeter deep, machined around the barrel for the shims to squeeze into. Now that would be rock solid.

Tim
 
Last edited:
"threaded "giant C mount" threaded barrel approach"

Hmhmh..

I don't get it.. How can you lock mount that it don't slip when you use FF ??


I had same question about M42 lenses..and never tried out..

Cheers, d
 
They slip if you roll the follow focus too far. I have Takumars that I used to use. For production they're useless.
 
Hey Kholi, have you played around much with the speed ramping on the RED? I just made a GPI trigger the other day and have been doing a lot of experimenting with it. I think I'm a little addicted to 113 fps.
 
A few times, just haven't had the need for it. For some reason I'm afraid to ramp in camera versus doing it in post. Despite the effects of shutter speed and such.

Trying to shoot an Action short where ramping will be a MUST. If I end up shooting RED then I'll experiment more with it but might be 200A + Ultimate.

How did you make the trigger? RED rocks the hause.
 
I just saw Wanted and I think they used the RED and its ramping for a lot of the action stuff. We're gearing up to do some fight scenes for a feature we finished principal photography on last month and are hoping to make good use of it.
I was reading on the reduser forum that the ramp can be triggers by grounding pin 1 to 2 on the aux port on the back. I dug into it a little more and that seemed to be the case. I couldn't actually find the tiny 4pin Din connector so I used an S-video cable removing the metal ring and bending the pins into the correct configuration. I attched a switch at the other end and that was that. Beautiful.
 
Actually RED footage never made it into the movie. I think there's a post over at REDuser about it. I need to get out and do some more ramping tests arg.
 
emretufekci said:
Hello everybody,

Can somebody explain to me what the variable speed of the ground glass is used for? More of the mechanics, how it varies from redrock which you can go f22 or 2000 shutter speed without changing the GG speed. What it adds to the equation.

Cheers,
Click to expand...

I've been looking around, still no answers. If I find anything I will post it here.
 
Heres my breakdown:
SG - Strongest, most robust. However doesn't allow rotation for dumb side witness marks or off center readings.
Brevis/EX - Set screws allow quick changing but weak connection. Under stress they rotate and slide slightly out of collimation. However they can be rotated for lens markings.
M2 - The most absurd system of them all regarding speed changes and other features. Their mount is strong, but can't be rotated and the actual metal for the mount is trash. The lens connection itself is awful and wiggles slightly under medium to hard rack focusing. Even light racks can sometimes alter the picture while shooting.

I agree with those opposing set screws. For the price, "robust" is the key word at play. I have strapped my HVX into a lighting grid a few stories high in studios multiple times. The adapter I consistently use is the SG for holding that lens straight downward. The same goes for intense handheld shots. I used a Brevis side by side with an SG on a promo video and the mount was constantly adjusted every single day due to twisting. Car rigs also require the strongest designs. Its not about "have you had a problem" its about "is it a weak point". Film rigging centers around safety systems built upon safety systems. If there is a potential weak link in the chain...eliminate it. Im sure its beaten pretty dead now but thats my .02

I personally would like at least a "lip" system with hard stops at either 180* or 90* so that its a little more concrete as to what is a proper 90* on center mounting of the lens similar to the mounting system to the camera lens. I don't necessarily like how the Brevis simply just rotates around and does not have a defined "center". I do like their collimation system though (if using only one or two mounts). This system could likely be implemented into the lens mounts rather than the ultimate body and still use the set screws (if the goal is to keep them ultimately). I'll try to mock up a Maya rendering of what I am talking about perhaps with some specs since I know there is 10mm to work with.
 
Last edited:
emretufekci said:
Hello everybody,

Can somebody explain to me what the variable speed of the ground glass is used for? More of the mechanics, how it varies from redrock which you can go f22 or 2000 shutter speed without changing the GG speed. What it adds to the equation.

Cheers,
Click to expand...

I think running the speed at maximum for the ground glass is best so that seeing the GG grain is avoided. The only downside is power consumption and noise. I know on the P+S Pro35 there is a sweet spot speed wise before seeing an oscillation. This could be due to the large diameter of the GG disc moving fore and aft. The Ultimate has a smaller diameter GG, so shouldn't have
this issue.

Oscillating glass is more limiting when stopping down or using high shutter speeds because the grain is more evident.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video
www.ssv.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top