Tie two EX zooms together?

Z

ZumaDog

Active member
Maybe this subject has been discussed in earlier threads, but is there a cable/controller solution to syncing up two EX cameras to a single zoom controller?

I'm imagining a Y type of cable connection from a Libec or other controller running to each lens input tap, but is there any better or similar solution developed for this?
 
How close are the cameras? If they are side-by-side (like for 3D), then you could just use a single big gear that engages the teeth of each of the lenses. It would keep them tracking perfectly.
 
Yes, it is for 3D work, but they will be in a prism/mirror rig and not side by side on a parallel rig. There must be an electronic way to do it.
 
Drop a line to the guys at Jony Jibb, maybe he could make you a custom cable for a cost
 
you can use a device called a lanc shepheard... check the spelling on the second word... this will sync the lanc controls between two cams...

on a side note which mirror rig are you using?
 
well, mirror rig is just a complicated way to mount cams side by side when cameras are too big to be mounted side by side.
Since you can mount Ex1 side by side (by removing the handel of one cam) , it should be a lot easier to use them side by side.
 
Unfortunately the ex1's do not have genlock so 3d is no-go... unless i genlocked an ex1 to an ex3 and removed the handle, but i still think the interocular would be more than 4-inches... how close can you get the lenses?

i know what a mirror rig is, i was just wondering which one you were using, is it a diy one, or that obscenely expensive p+s technic one, i think its like 27 grand!?!?!
 
nosys70 said:
well, mirror rig is just a complicated way to mount cams side by side when cameras are too big to be mounted side by side.
Click to expand...

actually I'm sure you mean that a mirror rig is a way to mount cameras at 90deg. angles to one another and not side-by-side. A rail system is the term generally used for side-by-side mounting.

AFAIK, EX cameras don't have Lanc control, so that option is not available.
 
yes , physically, cameras are not mounted side by side with a mirror rig.
they are mounted with an angle so a camera is not obstructing the other one.
result is you can have 2 bulky cameras with lenses closer.
But thanks to the mirror, camera would shoot as they would be side by side.
that is why i think if you can avoid using a mirror rig, just mount them side by side.
for the genlock, it is great to have it , but it is not mandatory.
at 60fps (or 60i) there is few chances that the discrepancy will be visible.
at least i have not seen this as a problem while shooting with my two sanyo FH1.
 
nosys70 said:
...
for the genlock, it is great to have it , but it is not mandatory.
at 60fps (or 60i) there is few chances that the discrepancy will be visible.
at least i have not seen this as a problem while shooting with my two sanyo FH1.
Click to expand...

I would have to disagree with you here, genlock is vital for sound sync issues. In fact, I am recording to an I-frame only codec to insure perfect and exact frame-to-frame sync for anything with people talking or other audio sync issues. If the "eyes" drift off even one frame it can be very noticeable with lip sync sound. For large vista shots, it's not really a problem and for those types of distance shots a side-by-side rig recording reasonable compressed codecs will generally yield good results. Having a common sync marker like a slate or hand clap or camera flash into lens works to sync in post.

But to the heart of this thread, zooming is a problem even with zooms tied together as each lens can distort the zoom just a tiny fraction and that leads to visual problems. I'm trying to tie the zooms together to be able to set fixed focal lengths easier and more accurately.
 
wow the ex series does not have lanc... im shocked!

anyway, yeah, for me genlcok is mandatory since i have to shoot in 24p, since 99% of people who will be watching this production will not see it in 3d, maybe in ten years it will be a little more common!

unfortunately i cannot do a search for other threads that discuss 3d, because the system will not do a search for a two letter phrase!?!?
 
search for stereoscopic
....and i do not understand this enjoyement to shoot at 24p.
30p or even 60p or at worse 60i is MUCH better, unless you plan to do a transfert to film.
 
nosys70 said:
....and i do not understand this enjoyement to shoot at 24p.
30p or even 60p or at worse 60i is MUCH better, unless you plan to do a transfert to film.
Click to expand...

Most of us like 24P because it replicates a film look. I shot interlaced 60i video for 25 years waiting for the advent of progressive digital 24P recording and I regularly turn down 60i interlace jobs because the images are so unpleasing and hard-edged.

Clients seem to really like it too, it's all I'm ever asked to shoot - except for slo-mo shots which I also shoot in progressive at 48 - 60fps.
 
nosys70 said:
search for stereoscopic
....and i do not understand this enjoyement to shoot at 24p.
30p or even 60p or at worse 60i is MUCH better, unless you plan to do a transfert to film.
Click to expand...

No progressive display can actually show 60i - only some form of P. They must deinterlace, converting to 30p, 24p, or 25p - shooting 60i is a terrible idea unless your market is the few thousand people who still watch CRTs at home. Only CRTs and a very rare plasma type can actually display an interlaced signal as interlaced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top