Redrock Micro35 vs. Cinemek

Seamus McFlannel

Seamus McFlannel

Well-known member
I've been following both the Redrock Micro35 and the Cinemek websites. I get the impression that some people on this forum prefer the Cinemek. My question is , "How has this judgement been made?" The reason I ask is that I have only seen sample footage from their respective websites and I can't see any difference in quality. Maybe it is the quality of the Quicktime movies. I am buying (if it ever actually ships) an HVX and I seem to remember reading that the HVX works better with the Micro35 , than it's HDV competitors because of the HVX's intra-frame compression. Is this true?

I ask, because at this point, I'm leaning to the Redrock product because of
1) Redrock's Followfocus, and 2) simply because it is available.
Any comments?
 
I think the Mini35 costs about 1 million dollars. But seriously, it does cost about $10,000.00 as opposed to the Cinemek which is supposed to be about $1,300.00 and the Micro35 which is about $850.00.
 
I'd say you're probably right on both points.

The follow focus is supposed to be fantastic and it is available now.

I first started following the G35 when someone clued me in on it back in the beginning of the summer and expected it to be the adapter for me for the following reasons:

A) The cheapest option = Which is not true now. I am a bit surprised that it does in fact cost so much although I have no doubt there is a good reason.

B) the best picture = Rumors about ghosting with the Micro35 kept me away but i have been told their latest version has taken care of this issue.

C) Shortly available = Here it is mid-january and they have not even begun taking preorders nor is there any word about when they will.

Ultimately I have decided to wait for an engineer buddy of mine who is constructing his own. He's agreed to make me one as well for the cost of raw materials. Which according to his design should be under 200 dollars. If that isn't satisfactory however I will probably go Micro35 unless i see some comparisons that prove G35 to be about 5-600 dollars superior.

I like the guys over at Cinemek and wish them luck but the massive delays on their product have caused me to lose the interest and enthusiasm i once held.
 
The Machinist said:
I like the guys over at Cinemek and wish them luck but the massive delays on their product have caused me to lose the interest and enthusiasm i once held.
Click to expand...
ditto- it has taken so long for it to come out that it gave me the time to try my own. I learned from all my previous attempts, and from what others have learned and now have my own adapter. So in a way I am glad its taking them forever, it pushed me to develop my own and saved me a ton of scratch :)

In fact the delay has birthed alot of competetors at better prices with great images. Seamus- look at the SG35, Wayne Kinneys adapter. Pretty sharp and affordable.
 
Actuaslly, the Letus35flip is the only adapter i know of that does what the P+S does for 800 bucks...it's a sealed system that flops the image and provides the usage of both Nikon and Canon mount prime lenses.

We have one here and I was trying to test it out without instructions.....still waiting for tech advice to get the best results,
however with NO knowledge of how it is ideally mounted, we have just shot some beautiful footage outdoors.

With all the other adapters there are some very dodgy work-arounds to let the camera operator secure any moving footage without having to compensate with magnets on the LCD and learning to use the camera while seeing an image that is either backwards or upside down or BOTH!!!!


The light loss on this model Letus seems to lose about a stop more light, but outside or in well lit situations, it seems to be the solution we have been waiting for.


You might look at this solution before movong forward.

As far as the G35..... we have heard many things about this stationary GG model for over a year and change......

It seems to me like all things that very few people have access to, the reputation of the G35 is based on conjecture and limited hands-on experiences. IN any case, the image will most likely arrive to the camera operator's eye upside down and backwards!

Time will tell!

<big grin>
 
How 'bout this for a comparitive shootout (assuming they all finally get produced*):

Mini-35 (reference adapter)
M2
Letus
G35*
MPIC (Dan Diaconu)

I guess we could argue about which camera to use . . .
Still, no matter which camera (pick one) it would be fun to put all the hype to rest and know which one would be the better buy (for each of us).

(I've had an M2 sitting here in the box since November -- now all I need is a camera to attach it to, sigh).
 
The Mighty Pico Image Converter:
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album25/DSC00023
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album25/DSC00015
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album25/IMGA0130_1
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album24/IMGA0746
I will independently shoot a few ground glasses spinning and shaking and the Fresnel screen I use on a dolly behind a Nikkor 1.2/50. All at the focal plane of the lens. Camera and the Nikkor lens will remain stationary. Same light, same scene, same iris and focus on the camcorder.
Long overdue.
 
Lack Of Bulk Sure..the G35 Doesnt Exist, So Basically It Weighs Nothing!!!

<grin>

Anyway You Look At It, All The Adapter Except The Letus35 Flip Provide A Nitemare In Post And On-set Of Upside Down And Reversed Images.

Do You Have Any Idea How Annoying It Is To Shoot Upside Down And Backwards?

Or How Much Time And Rendering Goes Into Converting All Your Footage In Post????

The Pros Use The P+s35 Because It Doesnt Need Work-arounds.

Im Just Puzzled Why The Idea Of Capturing Images With Such An Obvious Handicap Is Even Thought About As A Practical Way To Shoot, When The Letus35 Flip Is 600 Bucks.


Clarity, Anyone?
 
Brandon,

Nightmare to flip in post? It's really not hard to do. *click* done. Simple as that. Yes it's annoying to shoot upside down and backwards, that's why we use the magnet trick, or an external LCD.

There are advantages to not having a flipping adapter (tee hee...sounds like something Napoleon Dynamite would say)

1. Less glass to shoot through means a more pure optical path. Less potential distortion.

2. Less glass means less light loss.

I'd take an upside down image any day if I'm gaining 2-stops of light and a cleaner picture. If the flip is a nightmare for you, then buy a Mini35.
 
Yeah, I totally got you. Your imags with the Cinemek were really impressive in terms of sharpness. I hope I can make my Micro35 work like that after I get it. So far the Cinemek seems to be the superior product. But then again, internet clips, well, are just interrnet clips. No real judgement until I get my hands on them. On the other hand Rich Lee's images with the M2 were great!
 
It's not at all surprising,that the G35,a product that doesn't exist on the market, is so highly touted. Show me real results that have been replicated by real end users, and that will delight me.


(Someone's got a heck of allot of R+D expenses to keep the thread alive for a "product that isn't a product" on numerous message boards for well over a year, while the price continues to rise and the release date coninues extend into the domain of myths and legends)



As far as the Letus..let's be clear,the price remains the same for the model with the same shortcomings as the rest that don't flip.

The Letus flip model is 600 bucks, and it works and its available.


I'm not really sure where and what projects you're shooting, but if professional applications depended on magnets, turning studio monitors upside-down and image manipulation in post, then clearly the professional tools ( like the P+S 35 you reference) would come with a magnet too.

The work-arounds are simply justifications for products that arent ready for primetime professional applications.

FYI: The qualityof the image is actually degrading substantially when flipped in post, but I guess that's not at issue here.

All in all I say, enjoy whatever works for you and have a ball with the tools we are given to inspire our creativity!
 
FYI: The qualityof the image is actually degrading substantially when flipped in post, but I guess that's not at issue here.

I am absolutely 100% sure that photoshop rotation tools don't degrade the image when you do flips or mirrors. I'm not sure about FCP's or AVID's or Premiere's. If they show a loss of quality, I'm sure we could find an alternate that doesn't. For instance there are a lot of chances for the After Effects's alghorithyms not to do any harm to your video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top