RedRock M2 versus Cinevate Brevis : A Review...

That's sweet. Dennis, will existing users of the current Brevis be able to take advantage of this new, quieter design? Or will this feature ship on all new models. If old users can use it, what will we expect to pay for such an upgrade?
 
What a beautiful little girl Dennis and a beautiful shot as well.
Thanks for the explanation about DOF. Sounds mysterious but I guess that is what happens. Actually it will be nice to have more DOF sometimes as well. It will be nice to have the options.

I guess I've got the same question as Richard. Any chance I'l be able to get the quiet version in about 2 weeks when mine is supposed to be ready?

It's great to watch you constantly trying to improve your designs. Unfortunately it makes us always want that new one that's not quite ready yet.

I am still confused as to just what ships with basic unit. If its just one diffuser should I add the second one I see on your website that is an extra $150 or so?
 
Yes, once I'm happy with all aspects of testing, it will go into all future units. Any existing units can be retro-fitted and will be done well below my cost (like less than a tank of fuel in an SUV :) It will be tested for at least a month, maybe more as it needs to work properly with all the diffuser options, test lenses etc. The unit ships with the standard, soon to be called CINEFUSE 1, and the second diffuser, soon to be called CINEFUSE 2, is the one you're referring to Len.

The improving thing is indeed a bit of a conflict at times, but I've been upgrading older ones virtually for free too so no one gets left behind.

Thanks for the comments on our tyke. She is getting pretty good at getting filmed, photographed, recorded and otherwise documented :)
 
Last edited:
Could a retro-fit be accomplished at home with a few tools or would the unit need to be sent in for upgrading?

In total, by the new year, you will have the Cinefuse 1 which ships with the Brevis, the Cinefuse 2 which offers more diffusion and the Cinefuse 3 which gives the greatest amount of diffusion?

Will potential customers have the option of choosing their Cinefuse when they order?
 
While in Florida I found that for the close up type head shots where you want shallow depth of field a zoom lens is best with the Brevis. I was able to get the DOF really thin. It would be really hard to use if you are doing any type of rack focus because the lense control moves in and out along with the normal twisting. The cool think about using a zoom is that you can control the amount of background blur.
Our tests with the M2 and Brevis were similar but we never did a write up. The Brevis noise didn't really bother me because in interview type situations you would be using a lav anyway and it won't pick it up. During a scene type narrative the mic in on a pole far enough away from camera that it won't really pick it up either. Of course if you are sitting in a quite a$$ room with the mic on top of the camera you might hear it. The one thing I don't like about the vibrating GG is that if you get a flare in the shot its going to occilate and is really noticable on static shots. The M2 just blurs the flare in the direction the GG is moving. At the end of the day though the Brevis was the better adapter in my opinion.
 
Justyn said:
.....if we were saying this to people I think they'd confuse it and think I was talking about Bevis and Butthead. How did you come up with this name?
Click to expand...
lmao Justyn, Bevis and Butthead. :D

Brevis (latin): short, small, brief.
 
Without being politically correct or anything, I'd cool the Bevis & Butthead business as it could really feel like a slur to Brian and the other guys at Redrock who have done a fabulous job for our community and all of us as artists. I'm sure it wasn't intended that way though.

Dennis again thanks for the clarification. I expect you'll find a lot of us contributing to that tyke's "college fund".
 
Lenilenapi said:
Without being politically correct or anything, I'd cool the Bevis & Butthead business as it could really feel like a slur to Brian and the other guys at Redrock who have done a fabulous job for our community and all of us as artists. I'm sure it wasn't intended that way though.

Dennis again thanks for the clarification. I expect you'll find a lot of us contributing to that tyke's "college fund".
Click to expand...

WOW...If anyone knows Justyn, he would never make the comparison you are alluding too. Settle down and act professional and you will be treated as such.
 
Lenilenapi said:
Without being politically correct or anything, I'd cool the Bevis & Butthead business as it could really feel like a slur to Brian and the other guys at Redrock who have done a fabulous job for our community and all of us as artists. I'm sure it wasn't intended that way though.
Click to expand...
That never even crossed my mind. Only thing I saw was "Bevis" sounds like "Brevis". Brevis and M2, mighty fine products. :thumbsup:
 
Hey i'm not accusing anybody of anything - just saw a different way that could be read in a thread that generally likes one adapter more than the other. No big deal it would be unfortunate if it caught on though.
 
i saw alot of difference between the same adapter between different takes. i think in alot of the shots, the adapter was not "perfectly" adjusted. like the camera focus slippes a MF number or somethign.
 
Personally I think the whole thread is a bit...wrong. The title states "RedRock M2 verses Cinevate Brevis..." which like all the blah v's blah threads, they usually end up on a negative as the lovers/owners of either product step up to the plate in defence of their own decision/product choice.

I sincerely hope that no one is reading or viewing this review on any level other than for a bit of fun.

With all due respect to Richard, and the effort that he has clearly gone to, the review footage that has been presented here is across the board badly set up and shot, and in no way represents what either of these adapters is capable of achieving.

All over the board there are excellent examples of what can be achieved with these adapters and the combination of, careful preparation and set up, adherence to appropriate lighting technique, and a generally high level of craft skillset peppered with (if you're lucky) some innate talent.

Thanks again to rdgfilms for going to the effort but let's keep it in perspective.

Pete.
 
i agree with peter -i have been a lurker for a long time and this smacks of a bias. rgdfilms has already said he is selling is m2 so great - it doesn't meet his needs. it is hardly an unbiased view and rgdfilms should state that. that M2 butthead comment says it all for me

there are some obvious things that concern me on this whole thing like:

i have seen this no light loss before from redrock. it ended up that the physics created ghosting. I am very interested in seeing better tests that CLEARLY show this not to happen. Redrock was good about it and updated their adapter to fix this.

also, the semi-circle bit in the review is just flat wrong. 35mm lenses project a certain USABLE image size. As I understand redrock the ENTIRE usable frame is shown on that part of the adapter. why didn't you say that instead of talking something about vignetting? the tests on usable image were useless on this point .

then there's the weight. Redrock adapter is designed to be put on rods. they are up front that the entire kit weighs like 6 pounds with rods, rod plate and so forth. that to me hardly counts for "heavy". have you tried carrying an arri film camera around? also redrock could have used lighter carbon fiber rods, but they chose to use solid metal. it's built really well and can easily support a large lens follow focus and matte box. I do not believe it's fair to compare it to handheld. Many people (hundreds? thousands?) have used it with shoulder mount with reports of great results. I do not even understand the idea of using a DOF adapter and only handheld. How are you supposed to see it through the upside down viewfinder? how are you supposed to pull focus?? rack focus?

then someone wrote something about "did you see such and so footage, it really made a difference for me" wow. have you seen some of the redrock stuff on here like the illegal footage? also other adapters too like P+S even though it is too expensive.

I do not have any axe to grind with brevis - let the footage people create speak for themselves. This review is interesting but like peter orland wrote i think it is entertainment at best, misleading at worst,. I do not mean to be disrespectful really. with all these adapter wars its silly. just post your footage and skip all these amateur "comparisons" or at least leave them to professionals in controlled environments. thanks

respectfully

joseph
 
Guys, every adapter design has its merits, and its problems. There aren't too many objective reviews of these products, but Richard owns both, and certainly paid full price for them. I will say this. Reviews like this, and early reviews like them from the beta group, have made our product better. Guys like Richard take the time to evaluate and test to the best of their ability...with nothing to gain, but the comments from those who read the reviews, and the personal satisfaction of doing the review.

Our goals have always been to provide and continue improving on, the best adapter that we possibly can, based on feedback from our customers. The end results are better, more reliable, and more professional products from everyone. That's not a bad thing :)
 
:Drogar-Smoke(DBG): :Drogar-Smoke(DBG): :Drogar-Smoke(DBG):


I don't see WHAT I really need to state here? Yes I did put my M2 up for sale but that doesn't mean I sold it. I still use both adapters. They both have their needs for different applications, I just happen to be a Run and Gun, guerilla shooter, so, FOR ME, the Brevis is better because of that. I'm pretty sure I stated that in my review clearly. I also stated that this was an unofficial test for my own purposes but some people forget that. And no one called the M2 a butthead, I don't know where you inferred that from.. Also to comment on the weight issue. I operate handheld all the time and have trained my eye to look at upside down imagery. It's easy for me to focus with these 35 adapters because the focus is so shallow, once your image IS in focus it becomes crystal clear on your LCD. :Drogar-Smoke(DBG): Yes I have held an ARRI cam, blah blah blah... I've also carried bags of sand for miles. The thing about the HVX+M2 setup is that it is awkward to do handheld work because there is no place to comfortably position it. I usually propped it up against my chest and that worked but after a full day on my feet, the unit eventually became a burden.. Try holding it handheld with the rods and baseplate and a Marshall all day.. What I meant to say about the semi-circle projection on the M2 Cinescreen was that there was greater edge falloff with respect to the top left and right of the frame because the HVX was only focusing on one slice of this big rotating pie. Go back and look at the vignette test. Zoomed out, the M2 image looks circular on the edges, whereas when I zoomed out of the Brevis for the first time, I saw a flat, evenly luminous frame.. I am sorry, I should have explained myself better on all accounts.

josephfilms13 said:
i agree with peter -i have been a lurker for a long time and this smacks of a bias. rgdfilms has already said he is selling is m2 so great - it doesn't meet his needs. it is hardly an unbiased view and rgdfilms should state that. that M2 butthead comment says it all for me

there are some obvious things that concern me on this whole thing like:

i have seen this no light loss before from redrock. it ended up that the physics created ghosting. I am very interested in seeing better tests that CLEARLY show this not to happen. Redrock was good about it and updated their adapter to fix this.

also, the semi-circle bit in the review is just flat wrong. 35mm lenses project a certain USABLE image size. As I understand redrock the ENTIRE usable frame is shown on that part of the adapter. why didn't you say that instead of talking something about vignetting? the tests on usable image were useless on this point .

then there's the weight. Redrock adapter is designed to be put on rods. they are up front that the entire kit weighs like 6 pounds with rods, rod plate and so forth. that to me hardly counts for "heavy". have you tried carrying an arri film camera around? also redrock could have used lighter carbon fiber rods, but they chose to use solid metal. it's built really well and can easily support a large lens follow focus and matte box. I do not believe it's fair to compare it to handheld. Many people (hundreds? thousands?) have used it with shoulder mount with reports of great results. I do not even understand the idea of using a DOF adapter and only handheld. How are you supposed to see it through the upside down viewfinder? how are you supposed to pull focus?? rack focus?
Click to expand...


Don't understand what you're saying here..

josephfilms13 said:
then someone wrote something about "did you see such and so footage, it really made a difference for me" wow. have you seen some of the redrock stuff on here like the illegal footage? also other adapters too like P+S even though it is too expensive.
Click to expand...

Once again, sorry if you and others read my review this way. I think a lot of people out there in the community, myself included, wanted a straightforward comparison between these two adapters. If I had the money I would have included the SGPro and the Movietube.. This review is meant to help those that are on the fence between these two adapters and I just happen to own both.. I've now owned the M2 for 7 months.. Anyhow, maybe one day we can be friends. :zombie_smiley:

josephfilms13 said:
I do not have any axe to grind with brevis - let the footage people create speak for themselves. This review is interesting but like peter orland wrote i think it is entertainment at best, misleading at worst,. I do not mean to be disrespectful really. with all these adapter wars its silly. just post your footage and skip all these amateur "comparisons" or at least leave them to professionals in controlled environments. thanks

respectfully

joseph
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
i thought about which adapter to buy for a few months. i narrowed it down to between m2 and the brevis. on both respective websites there is incredible footage shot with both adapters and prosumer cameras. i think this argument / discussion is as to coke vs pepsi or marvel vs DC...with coke and DC being the obvious victors.
 
Hey guskersthecat, just to clairfy you say there are 3 different defusers. the brevis used in this review used the standard defuser right, which is different from the Cinefuse 1 which isnt used in this test. I just want to know if using these other defusers will help out when shooting outside, because from what i saw in the video in order to have a shallow depth you have to open the lense, but in the process the footage is over exposed. Will using these other defusers help fix this problem? and also increase the DOF?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top