Red Rock Micro Grabs

M

Mortimer

Active member
Here are some quick grabs with the initial tests of the Red Rock Micro35 adapter.

These were done to test focus detail, depth, color and contrast.

100mm prime 2.5, 50mm prime 1.8 - dvx100a F5 - blacks crushed a little in post.







 
Hmmm...For some reason I'm not too impressed by these. The interlacing is distracting, but for some reason they seem a bit out of focus, if not because of the interlacing.
 
I had to really compress these images down to get them on putfile - but I agree their is something a bit off with the focus, I'll see if I grab some pictures with the focus chart in frame.
 
Well I deinterlaced those grabs and I think they look pretty good. They are sharper then I expcted and contrast and colors are incredible! There is the ghosting effect on the spider web grab, but other than that, I can't see why all the negative comments, I've seen much, much worse...
 
I haven't had a chance to deinterlace, but I will shortly to see about the focus.

If I ever have time I'll try and set something up shoot it and post for everyone.

I apologize for posting interlaced, compressed grabs - hopefully I can get some moving pictures up soon.
 
Here is a copy of the de-interlaced/CT'd grab 100mm Prime F2.5

And i assure you that the originals are in focus and look great.







These are loaded from the web and placed back onto the web so you are looking at third generation compression
 
I think these look solid. The de-interlacing really makes a difference. I've been waiting on the G35, but man these stills are intriguing. The M2 is $850 with rails, and the G35 is going to be something like $1300 without rails. Is the difference going to be worth it?

Oh yeah, Coffee it's you. The links work fine. :grin:
 
DOH! I know why I can't see them..... My job's proxy is blocking the site that the files are hosted on.... oh well........


Anyway, the G35 does not require rails at all.
 
Can you post some progressive frames without deinterlacing or color correction? It's hard to judge resolution after half the resolution has been thrown away and hard to judge contrast after the contrast has been changed.

Looks promising, though. I'd LOVE to see someone shoot a res chart.
 
coffee said:
Anyway, the G35 does not require rails at all.
Click to expand...

That's the beauty of the design. People keep wonderinga bout the difference in quality (I don't think there will be a big difference), but they are quite different designs... The G35 is much lighter and if combined with short and light lenses such as (not very long) primes, it can be very lightweight and guerilla, hence the incredible footage monterey was able to make on a simple road trip.

But rods are probably going to be more and more needed for the guerillas, after they develop a need for a follow focus system, and to use heavier lenses, such as long teles (100+) or zoom lenses.

Then, the micro 35 is considerably cheaper because it includes the rod system. It's heavier (of course mostly because of the rods) and bigger. But with a lot of advantages too. So although they can both do the same things (supposing the image quality is on par, at least by objective standards), one is "optimized for run/gun" and the other for "controled environments".

The tecnology inside the products also reflect this optimizations. One is a solid GG, so it is probably more rugged and durable (no moving parts), and does not consume power. The other is moving GG so it does not cast a visible grain. (note that I'm speaking unbiased, maybe there is no grain in the G35, either way both of them seem really sharp.

That is why I think both designers are truly talented businessmen, because even if they are "competing" with each other, they are doing so with a safety margin. Everybody wins.

Now I do have one rant. While the folks at guerilla 35 have right now the (famous and infamous) monterrey footage, that is more than very nice footage, but also availiable in full size/quality for download (OK maybe it's a MPG2, I can't remember) and playback on a monitor; the M2 footage availiable on the net is all compressed. I think Brian should post full resolution DV or MPG2 clips, so we could make an informed purchase decision.

Other than that, I wait anxiously for the day I will have a 35mm adapter solution in my hands...
 
Very nice grabs. Thanks Mortimer and Steve for deenterlacing. For a 3rd generation compression it's very good.
I agree with taubkin, the ultimate test would be a full quality footage but what I see here is very convincing.
Concerning the no-rod on the G35, it's attractive but I think I'd be a bit scared to put such a long adapter + lens on such a small thread. One'd need to be very careful while manipulating the lens. I hope they took all the forces and torques into consideration while designing it.
I personnaly like the small size of the M2 (I suppose it is the same design as the M1)
 
One is a solid GG, so it is probably more rugged and durable (no moving parts), and does not consume power. The other is moving GG
Click to expand...

I thought they both had a moving ground glass. No? Having something that does not consume extra power- thats great!
 
to speak technically...what you see in the firs set of images are not solid images but actually two feilds placed on one another to make one image. With an interlaced image what often happens is the grab will/may be taken during a time in the cycle where both feilds do not line up....in lamens terms, every second line of resolution is slightly shifted from the one above, there for making the image apear slightly soft or out of focus.
I hope that this helped. If im wrong on any of this someone please clear it up.
Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top