Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

OConnor CFF-1 vs Arri FF-5

Carl Dieker

Carl Dieker

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
300
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.prospectdeck.com
Yeah, pretty much like the title says:

OConnor CFF-1 vs Arri FF-5

Any opinions?
 
oconnor Cff1 is very complicated for me i prefer Arri FF5..never had any problem with FF5 but having problem with CFF1.handwheel lock positions on CF11 is very disturbing and gears loosen after using it very much.
FF5 is plain simple..
 
Yes, the CFF1 looks great, very, very modular, but not so good if "gears loosen after using it very much", as Kemalettin writes. Anyone else had this problem with the CFF1?
 
As always, depends if it's for yourself or others to use. If its your own kit you always tend to look over any subtle differences or quirks and go with it, I do. I love kit with quirks:) But AC's are one of the most fussy (sometimes just a pain in the ass) people that like a certain standard of kit and a certain familiarity, and for many good justifiable reasons. No matter how good another make of FF is, a top tiered AC is always going to want the industry standard...and that's an ARRI unit. And more so if you are renting and it's between two kits, the one with these accessories will win it...9/10 times.
 
Carl Dieker said:
Yes, the CFF1 looks great, very, very modular, but not so good if "gears loosen after using it very much", as Kemalettin writes. Anyone else had this problem with the CFF1?
Click to expand...

I have had experience with several different versions and the gears did not loosen up on me. I really doubt you are going to go wrong with OConnor they have been the industry gold standard for a very long time in camera support and have brought this quality to their accessories as well.
 
I've heard from several sources that the FF-5 has a much longer swing arm that makes it difficult, usually impossible, to position the arm/gear beneath the lens. This blocks the witness marks for focal distance. For good reason, your AC should be able to work with the witness marks on the lens. A talented AC over the age of 22 will have learned to pull focus using marks and the lens distance witness marks--as opposed to hunting with a monitor.
 
Ryan De Franco said:
I've heard from several sources that the FF-5 has a much longer swing arm that makes it difficult, usually impossible, to position the arm/gear beneath the lens.
Click to expand...
I think Arri makes two versions of FF-5 and the one with the longer swing arm is FF-5 HD. FF-5 Cine has a shorter swing arm. Both FF-5 and CFF-1 are the best follow focus systems available right now but I chose CFF-1 since I can easily adapt it to LWS, 15mm Studio or centered, and 19mm studio rod system and 15mm & 19mm studio use same bracket so I don't need to buy another rod adapter.
 
Ryan De Franco said:
I've heard from several sources that the FF-5 has a much longer swing arm that makes it difficult, usually impossible, to position the arm/gear beneath the lens. This blocks the witness marks for focal distance. For good reason, your AC should be able to work with the witness marks on the lens. A talented AC over the age of 22 will have learned to pull focus using marks and the lens distance witness marks--as opposed to hunting with a monitor.
Click to expand...

I've heard this too.

Personally I loved the CFF-1 when I had it on our cam - but the AC's like things standardized, and the standard is spelled A-R-R-I
 
Thanks for all the replies. People are critizing the FF-5 in favour of the FF-4 and saying that the former is more geared towards HD-lenses. But from what I've learnt, Arri will discontinue the FF-4 and replace it with the already shipping FF-5 Cine. The FF-5 HD will still be available.

Does anyone have any experience with the FF-5 Cine?
 
Since I work a lot alone, I also pull focus. The CFF-1 has a great function where you can actually lower the knob, which places it just below the rod. When I have been working with the R1 and the Canon Birger Mount, I always mounted the VF-FF-knob just below the 19mm rod. Shooting action sports, with a lot of fast panning, I had my left hand on the knob (mounted just below the rod supporting my zoom) and the right hand on the back working the tripod handle. It made for both stable and comfortable turns with the camera.
 
I love my CFF-1 for it's versatility...though it does require some getting used to, especially for people used to the simplicity of the arri designs. My only dissatisfaction with the CFF-1 system is the 15mm LWS bridge, as it doesn't perform nearly as well as the studio bridge (hard to secure, still can slide on my lightweight rods)...this could warrant a redesign IMHO.

The new ff-5 cine is very nice, like the clamp-on 15mm LWS feature (vs the ff-4 slide on). I haven't inspected it next to the HD version, so can't say for sure whether the arm is shorter (it was my understanding that the gear ratio was the same as the FF-4)...will have a look when I get a chance to determine if the arm can engage beneath the lens.
 
Love our CFF-1 package....

Now one question: Is there a a focus gear (about 32sprockets) that I can by that is longer.. We have the problem with our new hawks that when going from infinity to close focus the lenses move so much so the gears does not line up. So I need gear wheels that are longer / thicker or what you would call them... I would like it to be almost 2 cm thick... i think O'Connor does not have such gear. Would love to get a working solution asap since this kit is going to be rented rather soon.
 
I bought both FF4 and OC. I prefer the simplicity of Arri. So do my AC's. However, if were doing a lot of run/gun one man show stuff, I may prefer the OC. We ended up selling the OC. I've use the FF5 as well (not the cine). I think it's mechanically super tight. With the cine gearing it should be great. Overall, I find the arri FF's require next to no learning curve and few movements to set up.
 
Björn Benckert said:
Love our CFF-1 package....

Now one question: Is there a a focus gear (about 32sprockets) that I can by that is longer.. We have the problem with our new hawks that when going from infinity to close focus the lenses move so much so the gears does not line up. So I need gear wheels that are longer / thicker or what you would call them... I would like it to be almost 2 cm thick... i think O'Connor does not have such gear. Would love to get a working solution asap since this kit is going to be rented rather soon.
Click to expand...

Hi Björn,

Happy to hear you are liking the CFF-1!

The star coupling that interfaces with the driver gear is the same for both ARRI and OConnor; so the gears are interchangeable between the two brands.

You need one of these for the Hawks:

http://www.zgc.com/s/p/arri_381180.html
 
I bought my FF5HD back when I was shooting mostly F900, Varicam, and other broadcast cameras. The gear ratio has been useful shooting with still lenses which have limited rotation. I use a large diamater gear for turning cine lenses. LWS rods and gear arm under the lens doesn't really work, I setup with the arm on the "wrong' side of the camera, so it's out of the way.
 
For those still following this thread, here are my two cents regarding the CFF-1 vs the FF-4 from the perspective of a 1st AC (I've rarely used the FF-5, so transfer whatever opinions are relevant as necessary as they pertain to Arri)

Things I like/dislike about the CFF-1 (these are not necessarily pros/cons, but my personal likes/dislikes):
Low profile bridge. Will clear pretty much any lens. Dovetail design is nice in that it slides closer and further from lens. Exactly like the Clairmont-modified FF2's that are out there. Rotatable focus knobs are interesting, although I have never really needed it. May be a bonus for some people, but I find it to be an unnecessary feature that increases complexity. Speaking of complexity, even though I have small fingers, those little ratcheting levers drive me nuts. Too fiddly and requires frequent ratcheting and readjustment to get the lock/release friction 'just so' to avoid having to ratchet, if that makes any sense. But one person's complexity is another's modularity, right? The fact that you can switch the swing arm and gear to front/back means you can get the gear almost anywhere you need.

I am not completely fond of the 'feel' of the focus action. It is kind of like driving different cars - the steering is different in all of them, some have a more 'direct' feel to the road, some more spongey, some more dampened, etc. etc. Some people prefer the steering of an Audi over a BMW. Much the same with follow focus units. I feel the CFF-1 is a bit more isolating in terms of 'feel' to the lens. I consider tactile response quite important. A really well-maintained Panavision follow focus with no backlash has the best tactile response of any FF in my experience. I am as particular about the way a lens and follow focus feels as an operator is about a fluid head. Maybe even more picky.

Also, the white marking discs pop off the CFF-1 too easily.

In terms of FF-4:
I like the simplicity. One lock knob, quick to snap on, off, engage, disengage. Maybe if you work in a genre where ultimate flexibility is king, the CFF-1 fills that need. But in the world of multi-camera, fast-paced productions like TV series, where you are always swapping back and forth between studio and handheld, zooms, primes, studio FF, Preston, etc, having a FF that is quick and simple to use makes a big difference. If per every build cycle an FF-4 saves me 3-5 seconds over another follow focus that needs a lever twiddled here and there, I can already grab one quick eye focus mark in 3-5 seconds. 5 seconds may not sound like a lot, but it matters.

I also like the feel of the FF-4. A wee bit more direct than the FF-3. I'm talking minor nuances here, and the variance between different FF's of the same model is large, but on a whole, I feel this to be the case.

I didn't like the older knob design of the FF-4, with no protruding bump on the knob where the index mark is. This is important because I use my fingers all the time as hard marks on the wheel. But then Arri came out with a revised version of the knob so this problem is fixed. The CFF-1 has a nice lockable index mark, like the FF-3 design.

There are some rare cases where the FF-4 will not clear an oddball zoom lens. I don't recall which one(s), but none of the common ones have issues. Angenieux Optimo 24-290, 17-80, 15-40, all the Rouge lenses, HR25-250, all Fujinon Premiers, Fujinon/Aluras, they all clear. Basically any zoom or prime lens in modern rental inventory will clear. I think the Angenieux 17-102mm may not clear, I don't recall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top