Birger Mount and P+S Technik IMS Compatibility

[Thor Wixom]

If you had the option to put a P+S Technik mount on your Red, and then be able to swap out the Birger mount(s) just like any of the other P+S Technik adapters, would you do it?

 

[Caesar]

Sure. Why not?

 

[Emanuel A.]

If I well understood you, you're asking about the possibility to have our RED based on a P+S Technik adding the Birger Canon or/and Nikon, that is, both?

 

[Thor Wixom]

Okay, this was supposed to be a poll, but I messed it up. Maybe this thread will still serve the same purpose.

I would really like to see P+S Technik IMS mount compatible with the Birger mount(s).

If you feel the same, please make your voice heard. Perhaps they will listen and respond. If it happens, I think it could be the absolute best of all worlds.

-Thor

 

[Thor Wixom]

If I well inderstood you, you're asking about the possibility to have our RED based on a P+S Technik adding the Birger Canon or/and Nikon, that is, both?

Emanuel,

To clarify, I want to be able to swap lens mounts quickly and easily. The P+S allows you to do this, but as far as I know, it's not yet compatible with the Birger Mount.

I'm not sure if this is something P+S could make happen on their end, or Birger could make happen on their end, or if it would require collaboration on from both of them. Either way, I can't imagine a better combination of smart and dumb mounts.

-Thor

 

[Emanuel A.]

Understood Thor. Maybe Sanjin may bring his touch here. And give us his help. I second the motion. Who doesn't it?

Thanks for your (good) idea!

-Emanuel

 

[Paris Remillard]

It seems that it would be difficult to have the electronics in the Birger if it were attached via the IMS. My understanding of the way that the IMS works is that it's just a PL type mount further back that the other mounts are mounted to like a PL mount lens. But I guess that Birger's electronics are contained within the unit that is placed on the Red in place of the PL, with the power coming from a cable in the front, so maybe it would work.

The thing with the Canon EF mount, though, is that it can act as the base mount, similar to the IMS, for most other mounts because of it's short FFD and large internal diameter. So with the Birger and cheap adapters you can get many of the options that the IMS provides, and it should be pretty easy to make PL and PV to Canon adapters as well.

It also seems that the front end of the Red is going to need to be modified to even fit an IMS onto it. The IMS has a C-mount option which has a 17.526mm FFD (according to wikipedia). Just by eyeballing it, that seems to be deeper than the current Red PL mount, which means that the IMS would need to be deeper than the face plate of the Red. So, either the face plate would need to be replaced or routed out to fit the base IMS mount. So, personally, I'm okay without mounts like canon FD, leica m, and C-mounts, which have shorter FFDs than Canon EF, in exchange for less hassle. That's how I see it anyway.

But if it would work, great. Nothing like options.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

When I asked Andreas Dasser, Head of Development department at P + S Technik about Birger EF mount on IMS he answered that it's possible, but later because the first we have to get IMS on RED.

Also I would like to say that I am not working for the P + S Technik GmbH and also I would not be able to answer on many questions.

I am somebody who just have an idea and that could become a good idea in its own realization.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

So, either the face plate would need to be replaced or routed out to fit the base IMS mount. So, personally, I'm okay without mounts like canon FD, leica m, and C-mounts, which have shorter FFDs than Canon EF, in exchange for less hassle. That's how I see it anyway.

But if it would work, great. Nothing like options.

Also I'm waiting for Birger Canon EF mount to play with till IMS on RED is ready to roll.

Then we can see how to adapt Birger on IMS.

Also importance of leica M is that are one of the best still lenses.

For example you get Leica-M Noctilux f 50mm 1:1.0 that is T 1.1

for about less then Euro 5.000,00 and this extraordinary lens

is even faster then the speed of the

Arri/Zeiss Master Prime 50mm T1.3 (list price Euro 14.500,00).

Just count and calculate.

About importance for the low light RED shooting with the fastest lens

available in the whole industry I do not need to explain more here.

Also Noctilux is a very sharp lens at wide open.

Read more about Noctilux The Last Emperor>>>

 

[George A.]

Noctilux seems like a gret idea Sanjin, but is it really?

1. Imagine pulling focus with a 50mm lens wide open at F1.0 on RED (that's the main reason to use it in the first place), in a scene with movement. Close to impossible. Plus, the focusing element on the Noctilux is nowhere near what we need for cine applications (very, very short throw).

2. A 50mm still lens will have the angle of view of a telephoto lens on RED. Therefore, pretty limiting in its application.

3. The FFD is so short for Leica M. The focus ring on the Noctilux is very close to the rear element, that means it will sit somewhere very close to the P+S mount. Impossible to put a custom cine focus ring there and again, to pull focus (all this, beside its short revolution).

I can imagine you can use Noctilux as a telephoto lens in a very controlled scene with no movement - sort of like the still candle-lit close-ups in Barry Lyndon. Other that that, I am skeptical you can use Noctilux normally on RED. But who knows? Man's ingenuity has no limits. With a custom housing (and perhaps some front wide angle element to bring it back to a "normal" lens) or things like that, you can make it work. But I think it will cost a fortune.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

1. Imagine pulling focus with a 50mm lens wide open at F1.0 on RED (that's the main reason to use it in the first place), in a scene with movement. Close to impossible. Plus, the focusing element on the Noctilux is nowhere near what we need for cine applications (very, very short throw).

There should not be so much A BIG PROBLEM pulling the focus on ultra wide open aperture of f1 as I am informed well.

Look at the Panavision's Image calculator>>>

"...aperture and focal distance are the two main factors that determine how big the circle of confusion

will be on your camera's sensor.

Larger apertures (smaller F-stop number) and closer focal distances produce a shallower depth of field."

LINK>>>

2. A 50mm still lens will have the angle of view of a telephoto lens on RED. Therefore, pretty limiting in its application.

50mm lens is 50mm lens on Leica 35mm or RED 4K, a crop factor is about 1.6 and DoF is the same as 35mm if I am informed well.

3. The FFD is so short for Leica M. The focus ring on the Noctilux is very close to the rear element, that means it will sit somewhere very close to the P+S mount. Impossible to put a custom cine focus ring there and again, to pull focus (all this, beside its short revolution).

Leica-M Noctilux a side view.

For this "issue" we can always find a way to get things to work as we want.

I can imagine you can use Noctilux as a telephoto lens in a very controlled scene with no movement - sort of like the still candle-lit close-ups in Barry Lyndon.

Also for dialogs in a dark room, corners, cars, some other details of doing things in a dark space, etc...

Please correct me if I'm wrong here.

 

[George A.]

I will correct you Sanjin as you are either indeed not well-informed or hopefully you just didn't read my post carefully.

There should not be so much A BIG PROBLEM pulling the focus on ultra wide open aperture of f1 as I am informed well.

Quite on the contrary. Professionals can have trouble pulling focus on superspeeds sometimes (at F1.3), imagine at F1! The depth of field at this aperture can get insanely short, especially at the 50mm focal length (Noctilux).

Been checking your calculator link. For the Photographic 35mm format at 50mm focal length (Noctilux), the depth of field is:

- at 1 meter: 2.2803cm
- at 2 meters: 9.3651cm
- at 3 meters: 21.2667cm
- at 4 meters: 38.0054cm

Need I say more? You can now see that - not even counting the extremely short throw focusing ring - it will not be a "big problem", it will be a NIGHTMARE to pull focus in a normal moving scene.

50mm lens is 50mm lens on Leica 35mm or RED 4K.

You didn't read my statement carefully. I only said angle of view. Yes, a 50mm lens is the same on Leica and RED but ONLY as far as F stops, depth of field etc are concerned. The angle of view will be cropped dramatically from a "normal" lens on Leica to a long lens on RED, making it visually a telephoto lens. The limiting factor is in the fact that Noctilux will appear close to an 85mm lens on RED therefore its application will be effectively limited to the one of any other similar long lens (even though the DOF will be the one of a 50mm photographic lens).

For this "issue" we can always find a way to get things to work as we want.

Hopefully yes! I want to use Noctilux just as bad as you, but this modification will be very hard to make and very expensive - if at all possible.

Also for dialogs in a dark room, corners, cars, some other details of doing things in a dark space, etc...

Please correct me if I'm wrong here.

At the DOF figures and distances I pasted above (for dark rooms, cars, corners etc) you will definitely have trouble holding a human face completely in focus at F1!

Granted, you can always close Noctilux to F2, F4 etc, but then why pay so much for a F1 lens? We want to use Noctilux for what it can do, and for that Noctilux will have extremely limited application on RED ONE.

Don't get me wrong, I really want to use Noctilux on RED Sanjin, just like you do, but I cannot help to realize that except the hand-picked special cases that require lots of preparation and possibly some compromises in terms of movement/blocking, Noctilux at F1 is not a feasible choice for cine applications with RED. Of course, you can always turn all those "compromises" into style, just like the above-mentioned example of Barry Lyndon.

Take care.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Yaaah Eastco,

you sounds well experienced

and of course we going to have a look to all those "issues" that

in general somebody can apply to use of the still lenses for a cine job.

But have you ever seen one of the 35mm adapters with still lenses in (cine) action.

Give you some samples:

1. Shadows of the Past - USA/HVX200/Nikon lenses

2. Quiroga - Argentinian short movie/Sony Z1/Nikon lenses

 

[George A.]

Hi Sanjin,

It's not about experience, it's about Physics.

But I agree, some of those issues can be tackled - but only up to a certain point. Putting focus gears, rehousing etc is always something that can be done (if you have money), in respect to making the experience of using still lenses on a cine device more approachable - as far as mechanics are concerned.

But optically, using a Noctilux at F1 on RED is a completely different ball game than using still lenses (usually at F2.8 maximum iris opening) on a 35mm adapter. You can't change that really.

Don't forget, I'm on your side - we were both among the first to champion the P+S mount system on this forum. Many kudos for your initiative! I am just pointing out that Noctilux on RED is a daunting prospect and has very narrow applicability.

 

[zak forrest]

For Barry Lyndon they had video cameras shooting a side view of every scene, and drew with markers on the TV monitors what the focus should be on the f0.7 lenses they were using. The focus pullers looked at a side view of the scene and pulled focus based on that, instead of looking at the image from the camera.

I think the Red magic focus assist is pretty damn amazing, and I have zero trouble at all focusing at T1.3 on a superspeed using the LCD and the magic focus assist. I can't wait to use a Noctilux on my Red.

The aesthetic of the piece is a strong factor for stuff like this. The film I'm working on is all run and gun, all available light, all T1.3. The style of the film is handheld and soft already, from the beginning the audience is in a certain mindset where they don't expect or care for rock solid focus pulling. My focus pulling is perfect, nonetheless :turned:

 

[Joel Kaye]

It's not about experience, it's about Physics

Eastco is right on this one. He's not saying you can't focus on a rock at F1.0. He's saying you can't focus on a rolling stone at F1.0 - the second anything moves at 50mm F1.0 it's out of focus. It's just not a practical F-Stop to work at for most movie situations. It's fine for still photographs.

I'm more concerned about having enough light to shoot at F5.6 so the focusing will be a little easier.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

OK guys no movement that should be "catch" with focus pulling.

Only static shots without so much movement, visual descriptions, most of dialogs in a dark room, a dark corner details, dialogs in cars, elevators, staircases, holes, some other details of doing things in a dark space, etc...very specific shots for very special aperture, it's about effect shots in a dark.

Example: You have lips but not eyes like Brando in Godfather I shot by "Prince of Darkness" aka Gordon Willis, ASC.

NOCTILUX shots as the name describes itself.

 

[Anders Holck]

Superspeeds are F1.2.
1.3 is the T stop.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Arri/Zeiss Master Prims are f1.2 and T1.3 stops

Table Master Primes >> LINK>>>

 

[George A.]

Zak and Sanjin,

I also can't wait to use a Noctilux at F1 on my RED, when a Leica M mount becomes available. And it's precisely because of the aesthetics of this lens that I'll do that.

All I'm saying is you better take the Barry Lyndon approach with it - shots with still subjects, very controlled, almost no movement. It is pretty limiting, and I'm only stressing this aspect. You really can't do anything else with what essentially is a 85mm long lens with INSANELY SMALL depth of field while wide open. However, if properly planned, those few shots can be outstanding and can add immensily to a film - as in the case of "BL".

I've only been talking so far about Noctilux in particular, not about focus pulling in general. Since it seems I'm getting some irony here, I'll drop the subject.

PS Try shooting an entire film at T1.3 but only with a 85mm superspeed. After that, imagine doing the same thing at F1 (half everything). How many usable shots can you get?