What else is needed with the M2

[davidpula]

doesn't sound like it!

 

[jon ness]

jon have you used the M2?

My friend has one and I spent some time with it and a DVX100B. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not that impressed with the engineering of the thing. It seems clunky to me compared to the new designs. Don't get me wrong, I believe knocking off the mini35 for a grand was a real step forward, and for that I give the M2 a major nod. It is just that I don't think we are at the end of the road yet as far as 35mm adapters go, and the M2 appears to me to be kind of stuck in the mud as far as its ability to evolve. I think a lot of people get blurry eyed because it is the knockoff of a very expensive product (the mini35). However, people tend to forget that this very expensive product is a first generation design in a rapidly evolving market.

So don't let me rain on anyone's parade. It is just that after using the M2, I decided not to buy a proprietary product that I feel has glaring design limitations.

Everybody has different needs and wishes. For me the M2 does not fit my on-the-go type shooting style. I read the 24 review on the adapter, and it raved on the inventor and even called him an engineering genius. I almost had to laugh at that, because the thing is an exact clone of other peoples' ideas, and like I say, it has design limitations that any real "engineering genius" could quickly engineer out of the product. So I was left with the impression that the guys from 24 don't know very much about 35mm DOF adapters (most likely this is the first time they have been exposed to them. Since the M2 was pitted against a worthless product and one that was just antiquated, it came out on top.).

I think a quick example of the many design limitations built into the M2 is the useless PS mentioned by another poster on this site. The thing is useless, and once you buy it, you can't even get a refund. Sure, you can fix it yourself by hacking the product, but as the other person said, "wouldn't you expect to have it engineered right in the first place?" Ask yourself, would an "engineering genius" sell you a useless adapter, and then be so uptight about it that he refused to refund your money once you got a chance to try it out and realize it was very poorly designed? Well, the M2 has several glaring design limitations that make it a poor choice for me, and I am not about to pay for something from a company that sticks YOU with their "engineering genius" instead of refunding your money once you figure out the true limitations of the product. As a conumer, I think that is a wise choice. Truthfully, I was all hot to buy the M2, but fortunately my friend beat me to the punch, and I was able to try before I forked out the cash. If I'm going to have to hack a product anyways, I might as well build it myself from scratch. Truthfully, IMO, a vibrating Beattie would outperform the M2 anyways. So I was originally going to build one, but now that the Brevis is out, I'll wait to see how it performs, and if I decide it is engineered well, I will go ahead and buy one. So far, I'm much more impressed with the Brevis than I am the M2. The Brevis meets my ergonomic desires and low-light needs, but my final decision will rely on image quality. I think we can all pretty much agree that if the Brevis has image quality equal to or better than the M2 that the M2 is ancient history. They will be redesigning from the ground up, and anyone stuck with the old model will be left in the dust.

Having said that, I think if your shooting style fits the M2, it is a good choice as it will provide you will excellent quality footage at the expense of some light loss and ergonomic nonsense. So like any other tool, it really just comes down to how you particularly need to use it. One guy might need a hammer, and the next guy might find the hammer useless and instead require a crescent wrench. Some people buy Sonys, others buy Panasonics, and still others buy both. As for me, I won't be buying an M2 after having actually seen it, adjusted it, analyzed its design, and edited the footage I shot with it. It is certainly not a bad adapter, and OTOH it is certainly not the best either. The reason I mentioned that the manufacturers of the M2 were afraid to put it up head to head with other adapters was purely due to my own experiences with it realizing I could throw together a vibrating Beattie that worked a lot better for my needs (the Beattie is used in the MPIC, so don't knock it unless you've tried it).

That is just my opinion, and others will most likely disagree. If it sounds like I'm hawking the Brevis, I'm not. I recommend that everyone keep their wallets in their pants on this one until we get a good feel for the images it will produce. Every product will have design limitations, so I recommend learning about the products before you buy. I have never quite understood this "pre-sale" mentality. But once again, that is just my opinion. Other's have lots of cash to throw around and can afford to take chances. I can afford to buy exactly one adapter, so I'm going to buy one that is engineered right in the first place (once again, this is not entirely the fault of the M2 engineers. The product was an important milestone in the evolution of 35mm adapters. Let's put it this way, I won't buy an M2 for the same reason I won't buy a high priced SD camcorder right now. If I fork out the money for an adapter and a new camera, it will be spent on next generation designs. We all know that the DVX is a good camcorder. However, buying one right now isn't going to be the right choice for everyone. The same goes for the M2.)

jon

Real eyes use a product before they buy it and discover it's design limitations. OTOH, hype sells.