Redrock M3

Exactly

Exactly

JDDalllas said:
Lindquist said:
because the dslr revolution is much better an cheaper than buyin a adapter for 35mm film look.

The "DSR revolution" is cheaper but is plagued with a lot of very important issues. Ill take my EX Letus/relay and Zeiss over DSLR right now no problem. In a couple more years or less, they will have something worth doing a whole show on. I'll wait.
Those cameras are $1600.00 for a reason. A lot of short cuts were taken to get video.
Click to expand...

I prefer to have both options. Especially for interviews. The skin tone on the 5d/7d leaves a lot to be desired (except as stills, they're great in rendering skin detail) but in motion it looks poor compared to an EX-1 with an adaptor...you get the DOF, grain and a more natural look.

Here's a test we just did with the M3. More to come.

http://vimeo.com/14727713

C
Click to expand...
 
spinning...

spinning...

Mbala said:
Is the M3 a spinning adaptor? How does it hold up to the Letus Ultimate?
Click to expand...

Yes it's a spinning ground glass. Because the achromatic is substantially larger that alone is an improvement on the Letus Ultimate. Plus more improvements that are too many to mention here but will be addressed in the coming weeks.
 
One good thing...

One good thing...

Mbala said:
The window is closed. However the stuff works fine so for those who already have a rig there is no point in replacing it. All others are to wait for the Sony solution which may be just around the corner and will probably knock Scarlett out of the race.
Click to expand...

Is you can mount PL lenses on cameras that normally wouldn't allow that and be able to have proper flange depth and back focus. I've just done a test on an EX-1 with a PL mount lens (using an M3 adaptor and Cooke primes) and although it would be great to be able to do this with a 7D it's way cheaper to do it with an EX-1 (or whatever HD camcorder you already own). Why? Because i get an HD LCD monitor (from the camera) and XLR inputs (from the camera) that i wouldn't get from the 7D.

Test shot here: http://vimeo.com/14727713

C
 
Last edited:
Yes

Yes

Mbala said:
Is the M3 a spinning adaptor? How does it hold up to the Letus Ultimate?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's a spinning ground glass. But Redrock has always had that solution and keep getting better at it. I think of the M3 adapter more along the lines of the P+S Technik but at a better price.
 
I don't care about how ugly or good my rig looks, that's the last thing that will help me achieve a nice picture =P. I cinda' like the M3, looks different from anything else I've seen =)
 
Admir said:
I don't care about how ugly or good my rig looks, that's the last thing that will help me achieve a nice picture =P. I cinda' like the M3, looks different from anything else I've seen =)
Click to expand...
its the same as any other 35mm adapter, its just got a plastic housing around it, more added weight for no real reson.
 
I think the M3 looks great but coming to the party this late means that with the plethora of large sensor options on the horizon this appeals to folk who have an expensive small sensor camcorder and want to keep that investment. Looks good though - I must say IMHO that the Adaptor footage is still alluring - during the day. At night the bokeh rendition of DSLRs as they react to lights is much nicer and colourful.

But yes the DSLRs are fraught with issues no doubt. I have also seen that the DOF adaptors seem to have a depth to them. Did a corporate video for a company that we recently just finished and we used both a vid cam with adaptor and also 5D mark II. The 5D footage looked flat as far as persective was concerned and yes some of that was due to lenses and F-stop. But things just didn't look as deep and softened as the adaptor footage. Dunno if I am explaining that well but it's akin to the comparison between the Foveon sensor pictures vs bayer derived. The Foveon have a depth that cannot be created any ther way. The bokeh isn't as sharp I suppose on the adaptors.

A few years ago when digital was the rave in music it wasn't long before people started complaining that it was too clean and lacked a certain mojo. So they started looking for retro gear and Ebay became famous for selling really expensive 'technologically out of date' gear becasue it had a sound. I can see the resergence of adaptors when people want a certain look. But i do like the pop of DSLR and large sensor Digital Cinema cams. Clean and sharp. But it has it's applications and therefore the reason why we need to never close the door on tools - because we may buy back what we sold in the future at a premium just to get that look. Hold on to your adaptor I say.We have heard the saying before - analog is dead - digital is the way - we know where that ended................


Peace everyone.
 
Last edited:
Loren Simons said:
a setup like the XF and M3 *I believe* will give higher quality over any current DSLR solution.
Click to expand...

I agree. DSLR's have their place but I would take the XF300 and adapter over a DSLR for a feature I'm doing. Perhaps the DSLR could be intercut in a lot of ways or used as a B-cam for certain things (close ups with macro lens depending on the shot...or tight squeezes). But the XF300 with 422, better codec and bit-rate (at a lower cost than getting a nanoflash for AF100), good audio options, etc.

I'm likely to use an adapter on my second feature, but a DSLR will be on-set when I need it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top