Logan LeBlanc
Well-known member
Can't....wait.......must........have.....adapter.....
New 35mm adapter
- Thread starter bklyndv
- Start date
Logan LeBlanc
Well-known member
I Pity All Of Us!!! Broke People Need Affordable Adapters!!!
firstsingle
Member
Dude. I am so excited about this adapter. I didn't know starting off with a Dv camera was gonna be so fun. Until I can afford the Arri D20, my dream camera. I'll just spend all the money I can on cool stuff I find on these forms.
Its designer / developer posted it to be $209 for the base model adapter.
It's around $500 for the 'Pro' model, wait a minute . . .
What the hell post are you replying to?!
Look, I'm not trying to shake a finger by any means, but if you simply read the first posts it's pretty much discussed out and out at least 5 times.
READ, DAMN YOU. READ.
It's around $500 for the 'Pro' model, wait a minute . . .
What the hell post are you replying to?!
Look, I'm not trying to shake a finger by any means, but if you simply read the first posts it's pretty much discussed out and out at least 5 times.
READ, DAMN YOU. READ.
visualbrother
Active member
Eh? Sounds to me you didn't follow the entire thread 
There is going to be a $209 and $600 pro version if I'm not mistaken.
There is a 10,000 adapter but I don't think anyone here is trying to sell his/her home made one for 10K. I would start building them if peolpe paid 10K for one
----
Cartoons of steve jobs using windows have been released in Denmark..... OMG!
There is going to be a $209 and $600 pro version if I'm not mistaken.There is a 10,000 adapter but I don't think anyone here is trying to sell his/her home made one for 10K. I would start building them if peolpe paid 10K for one
----
Cartoons of steve jobs using windows have been released in Denmark..... OMG!
darkfader said:
Wow, which adapter are you talking about?!?
Jim's Go35, last we heard, will only be $209.... about $8,000 than the price you were quoted. Maybe you got the "special."
There is a high end version in the works, as well, which I think he's retooling, and according to him, it would be cheaper than what he first projected ( a little over $500).
$10,000? If you're willing to pay that, I think that would make jim's day....
Last edited:
visualbrother
Active member
The DVX is not made out of metal, my main worry with all these adapters is having a stupid little accident and ripping the camera apart.
To be honest I think not using a rod support for such a large 'extension' is a bit trikcy considering you are mounting it on a plastic lens. The amount of torsion it can handle is not going to be great. Using a mattebox or even a century optics wide angle converter comes with he advice to use rods.
Still should be cool to put my 17mm nikon lens on the adapter, or the 180degree fisheye screw-on.
I guess the next step will be home made shoulder mounts for hot-rodded DVX's. Whatever you shoot you will need to use the external screen anyway so you probly end up using something like the steady stick from tiffen because the weight will be extended even further away from your body.
To be honest I think not using a rod support for such a large 'extension' is a bit trikcy considering you are mounting it on a plastic lens. The amount of torsion it can handle is not going to be great. Using a mattebox or even a century optics wide angle converter comes with he advice to use rods.
Still should be cool to put my 17mm nikon lens on the adapter, or the 180degree fisheye screw-on.
I guess the next step will be home made shoulder mounts for hot-rodded DVX's. Whatever you shoot you will need to use the external screen anyway so you probly end up using something like the steady stick from tiffen because the weight will be extended even further away from your body.
If you've seen the pic of the silver standard adapter, it doesn't look too top-heavy.
The DVX is made of magnesium, even the lens casing, so I'm not sure if what you think is going to happen is actually going to happen.
I think you'd have to work really hard to 'rip the camera apart'. You could hurt it pretty bad if you go nuts with it, but then why would buy a multi-thousand dollar camera just to go nuts with?
If you mount it on a support with, say, a 3-5 inch buffer from the lens and are careful then you should have no worries.
By the time most of these theoretical DVX's are hot-rodded for stable 'run & gun', they're too heavy and bloated for stable 'run & gun'.
If you simply use proper care and planning, i.e. not mounting 5 pounds of crap to the front or jumping off a roof to catch your friends awesome backflip into your pool, basically like a reasonable videographer, you'll definitely be fine.
The video, key word being video, doesn't look THAT much like film without proper planning anyway. That being said, just don't plan to knock your camera into anything and you'll do fine.
I keep reading posts that say 'run & gun' and I'm not sure how depth of field helps this sort of camera-work. Most of the 'run & gun' stuff I've seen, like, take Lars Von Trier for instance; "Riget I" is entirely 16mm, but he could've easily used video and we'd see no difference. There's practically no depth of field at all, as there's no proper lighting. If you've got the camera wide open, how is this, or any, adapter going to do anything but cause a lot of problems?
The DVX is made of magnesium, even the lens casing, so I'm not sure if what you think is going to happen is actually going to happen.
I think you'd have to work really hard to 'rip the camera apart'. You could hurt it pretty bad if you go nuts with it, but then why would buy a multi-thousand dollar camera just to go nuts with?
If you mount it on a support with, say, a 3-5 inch buffer from the lens and are careful then you should have no worries.
By the time most of these theoretical DVX's are hot-rodded for stable 'run & gun', they're too heavy and bloated for stable 'run & gun'.
If you simply use proper care and planning, i.e. not mounting 5 pounds of crap to the front or jumping off a roof to catch your friends awesome backflip into your pool, basically like a reasonable videographer, you'll definitely be fine.
The video, key word being video, doesn't look THAT much like film without proper planning anyway. That being said, just don't plan to knock your camera into anything and you'll do fine.
I keep reading posts that say 'run & gun' and I'm not sure how depth of field helps this sort of camera-work. Most of the 'run & gun' stuff I've seen, like, take Lars Von Trier for instance; "Riget I" is entirely 16mm, but he could've easily used video and we'd see no difference. There's practically no depth of field at all, as there's no proper lighting. If you've got the camera wide open, how is this, or any, adapter going to do anything but cause a lot of problems?
rawfa
Veteran
Darn! I was so looking forward to do a backflip into my pool with my camera ;-) That was hilarious, Daniel. By the way, I once shot with my FX1 with the letus35 and a moderately heavy lens on one of those cheap shoulder mounts (inovators 800 or something like that) and it worked fine (that particular shoulder mount is not too confortable though). As for "run and gun", I guess it was not the best expression. I meant I really love shooting hand held shots. Anyway, I really hope this adapter works! The letus was too soft for my taste (I didn't try the letusA though).
visualbrother
Active member
'just don't plan to knock your camera into anything'
Oh crap I always knew there was somehting wrong with my planning:
Day 3: knock the camera about and see what happens
Really should learn to scrap that from the planning board.
So I guess I'm the only one here who knows what a ripped apart DVX looks like Shame never got a change to take some pics of that guys cam. You would have laughed and cried at the same time. Those darn french flags, thank god its wasen't my camera or my shoot.
Anyway all punny stuff aside, its still a gloryfied handycam. Its never been designed to carry any real weight on its lens. As far as I can tell the lens is plastic, I know the LCD and parts of the housing are magnesium. Any pics of a body? I remember seeing some ages ago, or perhaps that was of the nikon... can't remember.
Run and gun with a 17mm could be fun. And handheld? sure why not, most stuff people get jibs or steadycams for I do handheld when I was still shooting commercial. Then again most of that was shot with 35 pound cameras.
Actually planning on putting my lovely 180mm D lens on it and perhaps add a mattebox at the end, just to add to the more lens then camera idea.
I asume we are all carefull, after two years and a lot of shooting you can sell mijne as new it still looks that good, just don't misunderestimateP) the force of leverage.
p.s.
sorry about this, should probly turn this into a new thread.
Oh crap I always knew there was somehting wrong with my planning:
Day 3: knock the camera about and see what happens
Really should learn to scrap that from the planning board.
So I guess I'm the only one here who knows what a ripped apart DVX looks like Shame never got a change to take some pics of that guys cam. You would have laughed and cried at the same time. Those darn french flags, thank god its wasen't my camera or my shoot.
Anyway all punny stuff aside, its still a gloryfied handycam. Its never been designed to carry any real weight on its lens. As far as I can tell the lens is plastic, I know the LCD and parts of the housing are magnesium. Any pics of a body? I remember seeing some ages ago, or perhaps that was of the nikon... can't remember.
Run and gun with a 17mm could be fun. And handheld? sure why not, most stuff people get jibs or steadycams for I do handheld when I was still shooting commercial. Then again most of that was shot with 35 pound cameras.
Actually planning on putting my lovely 180mm D lens on it and perhaps add a mattebox at the end, just to add to the more lens then camera idea.
I asume we are all carefull, after two years and a lot of shooting you can sell mijne as new it still looks that good, just don't misunderestimate
P) the force of leverage.p.s.
sorry about this, should probly turn this into a new thread.
Last edited:
Motherboard
Well-known member
darkfader said:
LOL!
bklyndv
Well-known member
The idea of one of these things "tearing off" the front end of a camera is a big concern for me -- probably my greatest fear.
To that end, I had the machinist put an extra series of threadings so that weight would be more securely distributed at the front of the lens housing.
Still, that's no reason to go banging around clumsily
To that end, I had the machinist put an extra series of threadings so that weight would be more securely distributed at the front of the lens housing.
Still, that's no reason to go banging around clumsily
visualbrother
Active member
Ok great, just wondered if anyone shared this concern. Also wondering if some sort of support with a simple rod system might be intresting to develope. Shooting of some test footage is easy, but using this thing day in day out on long shoots is another story. I know from experience that after days of 16 hour shoots you will at times use the equipment to support you, not the other way around.
I don't know how long the adapter wil be but I can imagine with a 180mm lens you wil come close to extending the camera almost 300mm. With drama / movie type setups and slow shoots this is not a big problem. but I doubt many people here have the luxery of 3 setups a day. Any force put on the adapter wil in time cause some effect i'm sure of it.
The accidents are just a extreme example, I think when you spend 5k on a camera making sure its protected is good practice. Besides I think a film look adapter usually comes with the desire to use a matte box anyway right?
Its not to be a pain but I think its a good idea to look at a simple rod system.
By the way I just realised something today, all these 35mm adapters are 35mm Photo DOF, not 35mm film DOF right? I mean the gg creates a 35x24 image not a 24.5x13.5 one right? Or did I miss something? (kinda new to the forum so trying to catch up on all these posts)
I don't know how long the adapter wil be but I can imagine with a 180mm lens you wil come close to extending the camera almost 300mm. With drama / movie type setups and slow shoots this is not a big problem. but I doubt many people here have the luxery of 3 setups a day. Any force put on the adapter wil in time cause some effect i'm sure of it.
The accidents are just a extreme example, I think when you spend 5k on a camera making sure its protected is good practice. Besides I think a film look adapter usually comes with the desire to use a matte box anyway right?
Its not to be a pain but I think its a good idea to look at a simple rod system.
By the way I just realised something today, all these 35mm adapters are 35mm Photo DOF, not 35mm film DOF right? I mean the gg creates a 35x24 image not a 24.5x13.5 one right? Or did I miss something? (kinda new to the forum so trying to catch up on all these posts)
Last edited:
setarcos
Well-known member
That rods support system is ready and anodized. Not that "simple" but fully adjustable (heights of different cameras, off-set positioning, weight balance, up-side-down mount (optional). I will make it avail soon and keep you posted. Accommodating cameras from the tiniest 1CMOS to HVX200 (up-side-down)
Emanuel
Cross-Examiner
www.dandiaconu.comDJ Lewis said:Wow, which adapter are you talking about?!?
Jim's Go35, last we heard, will only be $209.... about $8,000 than the price you were quoted. Maybe you got the "special."
