New adjustable PL->m4/3 from ciecio7

heavyG

heavyG

Underwater Giraffe Member
Ryszard (ciecio7 & www.foto-akcesoria.com.pl/sklep/ ) has just sent me a pre-production sample of his new PL to M4/3's mount.

Pretty heavy duty like his previous mount with the added strength of a lw 15mm rod mount and the ability to adjust flange focal distance with a lens / null lens in place. This means that you don't have to take the mount / lens off to put in a shim and then put the whole mess back together to see if you guessed the right shim thickness…

ffd.jpg


Put it together this morning and tested it out - really easy to adjust, and it took maybe 10 minutes to get the flange distance bang on.

While my unit seems really well built, with tight tolerances, Ryszard says that production models will be machined better and have a higher overall quality.

Looks like he'll be selling these on EBay for $1,700 or through his website at a discount. I will be buying a second one for my other AF100.

*** I am in no way associated with the manufacturer or seller of these mounts - I just received one in the mail for testing. ***
 
Last edited:
too pricey if you ask me...for that kind of money I think hot rod pl mount would be a better choice...since it comes with the whole rig..
 
I guess you have to decide if ease of adjustment is worth it to you. If you use your camera all the time, and need to keep your flange focal distance very precise - but don't want to spend an afternoon shimming and checking, this may be for you.
 
There is another one coming too. I've been playing with the Letus PL prototype. The adjustment is preposterously easy. It's basically the same system that they had on the Letus Ultimate -- loosen two thumbscrews, rotate it to perfect focus, and then tighten it down. It's pretty fantastic.
 
Barry_Green said:
There is another one coming too. I've been playing with the Letus PL prototype. The adjustment is preposterously easy. It's basically the same system that they had on the Letus Ultimate -- loosen two thumbscrews, rotate it to perfect focus, and then tighten it down. It's pretty fantastic.
Click to expand...

so these two are *essentially* the same-ish. I've got too much going on to spend an afternoon at the bench every couple of shoots fooling around with shims...
 
nice work

nice work

First of all congrats to my fellow Pole -brilliant engineering effort nicely executed. :thumbsup:It's pricey but it also is a lot more complicated and precise than the non adjustable ones.
I do have problem with the adjustable adapter concept however. I've been actively working in the film production environment for 25 years now. Here is what I know/learned
1. Adapters should be built to certain height (in case of PL2M4/3-32.95mm-33mm)and left alone.
2. if your lens is not focusing you should check and adjust it(the lens) not adapter.
3. If after the lens is verified correct it's still not in focus you should check and adjust the camera flange.
Here is why:
if your lens is off and you compensate with adapter the next lens you put on will be off again and you have to readjust. Very stressful and inconsistent if you are trying to do it on the set.
If your lens is right and the camera flange is off you'll have a problem when trying to use M4/3, Canon or Nikon lenses on your camera. you basically have three variables now that you have no idea about. Total mess. Adjustable adapter is only contributing to more mess...

Another point is that PL lenses are usually kept properly focused to be used on other cameras so you only need to adjust once- constant readjusting would just create confusion, especially on a (production) set for an inexperienced AC/operator.

OK rant over. You've been warned- you are just spending more money and digging yourself deeper..
This has nothing to do with the product- the manufacturer did a great job supplying what he thought the marked needed. The price point is fully justified IMO. I just don't like the concept- especially drawing from some calls and questions I've been receiving recently- totally clueless....
Good luck to the product and the creator .....
 
Last edited:
optitek said:
First of all congrats to my fellow Pole -brilliant engineering effort nicely executed. :thumbsup:It's pricey but it also is a lot more complicated and precise than the non adjustable ones.
I do have problem with the adjustable adapter concept however. I've been actively working in the film production environment for 25 years now. Here is what I know/learned
1. Adapters should be built to certain height (in case of PL2M4/3-32.95mm-33mm)and left alone.
2. if your lens is not focusing you should check and adjust it(the lens) not adapter.
3. If after the lens is verified correct it's still not in focus you should check and adjust the camera flange.
Here is why:
if your lens is off and you compensate with adapter the next lens you put on will be off again and you have to readjust. Very stressful and inconsistent if you are trying to do it on the set.
If your lens is right and the camera flange is off you'll have a problem when trying to use M4/3, Canon or Nikon lenses on your camera. you basically have three variables now that you have no idea about. Total mess. Adjustable adapter is only contributing to more mess...

Another point is that PL lenses are usually kept properly focused to be used on other cameras so you only need to adjust once- constant readjusting would just create confusion, especially on a (production) set for an inexperienced AC/operator.

OK rant over. You've been warned- you are just spending more money and digging yourself deeper..
This has nothing to do with the product- the manufacturer did a great job supplying what he thought the marked needed. The price point is fully justified IMO. I just don't like the concept- especially drawing from some calls and questions I've been receiving recently- totally clueless....
Good luck to the product and the creator .....
Click to expand...

I'm having difficulty with your arguments… Lets assume that Panasonic IS shipping Af100's with a consistent and correct FFD* for the m4/3 lens mount. (this negates your argument about a 3rd variable, and the inability to later use non PL glass)

My lenses are properly calibrated / collimated on the bench, and on cameras (RED / Alexa) with properly calibrated FFD's* they hit their witness marks exactly. However upon testing several PL to m4/3 adapters on the AF100 a couple of the non-adjustable adapters would not allow me to hit focus on the witness marks. This would lead me to believe that the adapters were not a consistent FFD* and therefore needed to be adjusted (shimmed or otherwise).

I'm not sure why you think the following has anything to do with this particular adapter -and I quote:

optitek said:
" Another point is that PL lenses are usually kept properly focused to be used on other cameras so you only need to adjust once- constant readjusting would just create confusion, especially on a (production) set for an inexperienced AC/operator.
Click to expand...

By using the calibration ring on this adapter you are changing nothing on the lens itself - and I have no idea why you would think this would lead to confusion on set, since all adjustment and set-up would be done on the prep day before going out to set. I would never want to do this adjustment during a shoot.

In the end you have basically said that anyone who purchases a shimmable or adjustable PL to m4/3 adapter is just asking for trouble. Tell that to the guys who purchase these adapters (from various manufacturers), who have lenses that are verified correct but can't hit their witness marks.

I guess RED got it all wrong when they built this adjustability INTO the camera?

Anyway here is some light viewing on the subject of calibrating FFD (Flange Focal Distance) from Mitch Gross at Abel CineTech in New York:


and maybe this one too
 
adjustability

adjustability

heavyG said:
I'm having difficulty with your arguments… Lets assume that Panasonic IS shipping Af100's with a consistent and correct FFD* for the m4/3 lens mount. (this negates your argument about a 3rd variable, and the inability to later use non PL glass)

My lenses are properly calibrated / collimated on the bench, and on cameras (RED / Alexa) with properly calibrated FFD's* they hit their witness marks exactly. However upon testing several PL to m4/3 adapters on the AF100 a couple of the non-adjustable adapters would not allow me to hit focus on the witness marks. This would lead me to believe that the adapters were not a consistent FFD* and therefore needed to be adjusted (shimmed or otherwise).
Click to expand...
This is precisely my point:
Had the adapter been built to specs you wouldn't have a problem with hitting marks and wouldn't needed adjustability.
FYI I designed and build a back focus instrument called Optimator that not only verifies flange but also all six axis of sensor alignment as well as matching cameras for 3D work. http://optitek.org/optimator.php
AFAIK the only device that does it...
I know my business and trust me when I tell you- this is trouble...
Red is a different market segment where the users can actually afford $3-4K test devices- I just don't see the AF100 owners doing that...
I will happily stand corrected with the first Optimator order from an AF100 owner:engel017:
 
Last edited:
optitek said:
This is precisely my point:
Had the adapter been built to specs you wouldn't have a problem with hitting marks and wouldn't needed adjustability.
FYI I designed and build a back focus instrument called Optimator that not only verifies flange but also all six axis of sensor alignment as well as matching cameras for 3D work. http://optitek.org/optimator.php
AFAIK the only device that does it...
I know my business and trust me when I tell you- this is trouble...
Red is a different market segment where the users can actually afford $3-4K test devices- I just don't see the AF100 owners doing that...
I will happily stand corrected with the first Optimator order from an AF100 owner:engel017:
Click to expand...

I don't know - I own the Null lens for calibrating, I looked at your Optimator but decided to go with the equipment that the local techs and rental houses use. I didn't see the value in your more complex device. As for the argument that the FFD shouldn't be adjustable; it just doesn't hold water… If every PL mount camera was built to specs then no-one would need to buy your pricey test equipment, and none of the camera producers would have adjustability built in, nor would the techs at the rental houses check / adjust FFD after every rental.

Not sure that you are on the mark when you put AF100 owners in a lower bracket… Lot's of owners here will take offence at that remark.

If you don't like it don't buy it (actually you have a competing product that you're trying to sell, don't you???) . I just wanted to let the community know that this new product is out there and offers what some are looking for. Not everyone here is a 16 year old kid with no experience, so stop trying to confuse the matter.

*** I am in no way associated with the manufacturer or seller of these mounts - I just received one in the mail for testing. ***
 
Last edited:
No need to get defensive. I'm sorry that you feel that this is an argument- I thought we had an exchange of opinions. I don't have any hidden agendas here- only trying to share my extensive experience. I thought it was a good thing...
Again- this product is well engineered and looks like it's equally well made- good luck!!!
 
Hey, I just wandered over to read this thread and up pops my mug! I look a little sleepy in that frame grab.

The point to me is that there can be variations in the individual cameras and the individual adapters. Years of experience has shown me that this is very much true in even the finest high end gear. And it only takes a few microns, so just a bit of dust buildup is enough to effect things eventually. An adjustable mount adapter can be tuned to an individual camera, tweaking out the variations between the two devices, and then if it is left on the camera is likely will never need adjusting again. That's what we do with our rental cameras here at AbelCine, and if someone buys an adjustable adapter along with a camera then we can set them to one another as well.
 
I think you guys probably both understand the situation fully, but for those who may be new to this, let's discuss a bit...

The thing about an adjustable mount is that, ideally, it shouldn't be necessary. The mount should be exactly and precisely the distance necessary from the sensor. Every film camera I've had (usually older ones), they don't even have a way to adjust the mount distance. It just "shouldn't" be necessary to do so. In the real world, however, especially with an interchangeable adapter, it sometimes is necessary to adjust the distance, and if someone adjusts improperly that can cause complications.

Assuming I am interpreting correctly, Optitek's point is that you should have a perfectly-aligned adapter and that you shouldn't get caught up in the trap of using the mount to "chase" after lenses whose collimation is off. And I totally agree. While a shimmable mount makes it possible to adjust, ideally you shouldn't have to -- if you have two lenses and one of them focuses spot-on and another one doesn't, you probably should be adjusting the non-focusing lens, not the mount on the camera.

All my Compact Primes were "off" when used on my original Ciecio7 (non-adjustable) mount. That's a pretty clear indication that it is the mount, and not the lenses, that was the problem. With the new adjustable mount I have, I took the time to calibrate it perfectly, and now shazam -- all my lenses work. If I encounter a case where one of my lenses (or any future lens) doesn't work, then I will presume that the lens needs collimation, and not the mount.

The problem with all these inexpensive camera adapters (not just PL, but Nikon and Canon and all that) is that they're designed to "guarantee infinity focus" and they can do that by making the mount just a little shorter than the spec truly calls for. If the mount distance is just a tiny bit narrower, it means that all your lenses will definitely be able to hit infinity. But, it also inherently means the mount isn't perfectly aligned. My Ciecio7 certainly wasn't. And on a stills camera it's not usually a big deal because stills lenses aren't marked accurately or frequently enough for their focus marks to be truly usable anyway. But with real cinema lenses with real housings and real markings, it becomes a very big deal. Which is why we're now seeing the introduction of more shimmable or otherwise-adjustable PL mounts.

The solution is to either have a perfect mount that is guaranteed at all times to deliver the requisite 52.00mm distance, or to have an adjustable mount which you can then calibrate to your camera so that you achieve a perfect 52.00mm distance. And then, from then on, not to ever touch the mount again (as Mitch said). If a certain lens doesn't hit the marks, it is folly to adjust the mount to make up for the lens' problem, you should instead recognize where the issue is and adjust the lens itself.

If someone doesn't intend to rely on the witness marks, or rely on a zoom holding focus throughout its range, then none of this matters and the non-shimmable mounts are just fine for that use (and much less expensive!)

If you want the focus witness markings to line up perfectly, then I do recommend either getting an adjustable PL mount, or get a mount that guarantees absolute perfect distance to the sensor (which may or may not even be possible; I don't know the manufacturing tolerances on the body and the sensor positioning, maybe they guarantee pinpoint precision and maybe they allow for a range of, oh, who knows, +/- 0.1mm or something -- but if they do, that .1mm can have a noticeable effect on focus!) If you have a perfectly-positioned 52mm distance, there's no need for an adjustable mount. If you don't have a guarantee on that, then an adjustable mount is highly recommended -- if only to adjust it once so that it is at a perfect 52mm.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top