Easy interchangeable mount for Epic?

[Sanjin Jukic]

Anyone that's shot with Master Primes or PV Primos (and knows what the hell they're doing) is going to know this. Cinema cameras are very precise instruments and changing a lens mount is not a trivial operation, that's why Chrosziel collimator's cost $40 grand. Focus tollerances for cinema cameras start at about .0005". When you start blowing images up to 80 feet across you'll know why. The Arri Master Primes are so sensitive to this that they require[SIZE=-1] a 150,000 Euro off-axis MTF measuring system to service.[/SIZE] So if you think you're just going to whip the mount off and slap your nikon FD lenses on for one take and then go back to those beautiful MP's for the following setup, you've lost your mind.

I really think that people need to think this through a little more carefully before we all start begging for features that are going to compromise the design of the camera.

I'd also suggest people get a better grasp of why most cameras DON'T offer field interchangable mounts (and why they are usually aftermaket solutions aimed at amateurs and students).


J

You must be kidding or you are "living" and even "shooting" in a sort of ideal world of 3D/CAD

application when you can easy "control' all tolerances you are talking about .

Sorry but I couldn't resist .

BTW, the interchangeable mount *** that I have installed on my RED1 is made by Academy Technical Award Winners 2008

the professionals that make their "bread and butter" daily working and dealing with all types of lens and camera tolerances.

 

[JonathanF]

Sanjin,

As I said, "most cameras" and I did _also_ say there are some very well made ones. Your mount is not a full mount swap, yours uses precision machined mount inserts to accomplish this little bit of trickery. The very rare example of the P+S mount is a valid option assuming you can match all your optics to the fixed backfocus adjustment on the mount.

Perhaps you've done that, perhaps you haven't, but I too have worked on Academy Award winning films and I'm not going to get in a flame war with someone over lens mounts when the principles are well understood and the intent of my post was pretty clear.

I will also add that the mount you are talking about also did away with the screw adjustable backfocus as well preferring to use shims like most of us are used to on precision cinema cameras.

Don't get me wrong, it could be done, but as soon as those 4 bolts get touched (and I'll have locktite on mine) the camera's going in to get tech'd. I owe it to my clients, some of whom have spent more than $100M on pictures I've worked on. In addition to having sharp ideas and technical expertise I am in the business of selling certainty to my producer.

J

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

JonathanF,

probably you are highly experienced shooter and I could believe you.

By the way the IMS collimation using shims and not screws.

You can collimate using thousands $ collimator or you can also collimate by your "own".

It's up to a situation and budget to deal with collimation as with any other cine camera.

Also screws are used only to fix a flange.

 

[JonathanF]

Sanjin,

I should also add that I don't live in a world where I have the luxury of working with a camera that I've deliberately modified it in a way that knowingly invalidates the camera's warranty.

That's why I feel compelled to work within the limits Jim has given us in terms of modifying the existing mount despite my feeling that it could be better.

The next camera will likely be an improvement, and while it may not meet all of my hopes and dreams for the worlds greatest mount, I'll work within the boundaries Jim and the team establish (in terms of warranty) on that one as well. I am not looking for the perfect mount and a few minor tweaks will likely address all my concerns.

Don't get me wrong with regard to the mount you are talking about, I'm certainly a fan, but not on the R1. Not when I may at some time in the future need to use that support lifeline to get out of a jam.

J

 

[JonathanF]

You can collimate using thousands $ collimator or you can also collimate by your "own".

It's up to a situation and budget to deal with collimation as with any other cine camera.

As long as I am only paying $50 for columnation from a tech that probably performs that operation 15 times a week, I have no issue getting it done each time I go in to pick up my lens package for a job. By my account I can pay $2000 for my own less precise instrument or I can get the camera done for me 40 times and bill it against every job as a part of the rental for the same price and I don't have to be bothered.



I appreciate the post, but I'd rather spend an extra hour at dinner with my wife than spend that time teching my camera when I can pay a certified expert with the proper tools to do it for me for less than my time is worth.

Again, different users are going to have different requirements, mine may be more stringent than other users, but the camera should, if possible, be built around precision requirements of working professionals and not those of the amateur (not that this is anywhere near the case with the R1) so long as it does not effect the price point of the camera in a way that harms it's commercial viability.

Given my experience with the camera I suspect that this level of technical excellence and innovation is Red's intention. My hat's off to them for involving all of us in the process when developing the new camera. I think many of us can provide unique and specific insight that terms from practical experience in the field that will benefit the design of the camera. Some of us are just more opinionated about it than others.

Cheers,

J

 

[Michael Panfeld]

Came across this: http://www.lensmounts.com/REDONE.html

Looks like somebody is trying to build a stainless steel OCT19 mount for the RED.

 

[Douglas Underdahl]

If I might be so presumptuous, I think what JJ meant was that you can do it either way with Scarlet, Epic, or RED, that is, you can have a quick change lens mount, or you can have a solid block of stainless permanently shimmed and mounted. Sanjin wants the former, and JonathanF wants the latter, I think. Both are valid ways to make movies.

I think that having a permanent mount (probably PL) that is bench checked or collimated every time you shoot in combination with lenses that are also collimated, so that tape and eye focus match very precisely and all the focus marks on the lenses are very accurate is excellent and for some productions, would absolutely be the way to go.

I can also see a wildlife shooter swapping between PL mounted superspeeds or Leica R speeds for twilight work, then switching to a Nikon mounted telephoto for daytime shots, not using tape focus at all, just eye focussing with the 1:1 check on Build 17.

With RED cameras, you can do both, or either.

 

[Douglas Underdahl]

I sell OCT-19 mounts for RED (but right now I'm out of stock - should have more in a week) $695.

 

[JonathanF]

Douglas,

Indeed that's what I was getting at. Thanks for that mate!

BTW, sounds more and more that the best thing will be two mount systems, one interchangeable and one fixed.

Given Jim's earlier posts about the mount being more friendly from an aftermarket/warranty standpoint, I'm pretty sure that folks like P+S are going to have a great solution for folks using 4 different brands of lenses on the same shoot.

For me, the added timing costs associated with shooting lenses with different contrast and or color characteristics (both in cost to me time-wise and $$$ out of production's post budget) far outweigh the cost of shooting with matched lenses, so I'll always advocate a bombproof mount because I will generally get production on board with shooting matched glass except for rare setups requiring some odd lens.

Cheers,

J

 

[tj williams]

Hi Jim n all

Hoping that our red one nikon/eos etc. mounts ca adapt to the 4 bolt plate. just a part of making obsolesence obsolete

 

[Perry Ho]

Bare in mind that the lens mount is very important part for the back focus, no-matter for Digi Camera or Film Camera, if only with one bolt, I don't think it is good strong and tight enough to hold for those big zoom lens or anamorphic lens, especially while on delivery and the traveling shooting, so, once you can't get right on the focus, it means you gonna spend more times to fix the problem, why take a risk for only few minutes quick changing?

Cheers

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The new mount system seems to be held into place by 4 bolts. Shims will probably not be necessary as long as the mount base is flush with the camera body. Back-focus is set within the camera by adjusting the sensor block, it seems the camera will calibrate itself based on which mount is installed. If it works as advertised, this is going to be an amazing new way of swapping mounts.

 

[JonathanF]

Bare in mind that the lens mount is very important part for the back focus, no-matter for Digi Camera or Film Camera, if only with one bolt, I don't think it is good strong and tight enough to hold for those big zoom lens or anamorphic lens, especially while on delivery and the traveling shooting, so, once you can't get right on the focus, it means you gonna spend more times to fix the problem, why take a risk for only few minutes quick changing?

Perry,

I could not agree more.

Make it robust and make it bullet proof. There are certain things that aren't worth sacrificing for convenience.

If people want to pay extra for this kind of gadgetry PLEASE make it an option. There are simply some things better left to the aftermarket. As I've said before, P+S already has a great option for people who need this capability and the next gen of that mount will likely be even better.

:J

 

[JonathanF]

Back-focus is set within the camera by adjusting the sensor block, it seems the camera will calibrate itself based on which mount is installed. If it works as advertised, this is going to be an amazing new way of swapping mounts.

How's this going to hold up on a camera car vibrating around all day, or worse, in a helicopter?

:J

 

[Steve Gibby]

How's this going to hold up on a camera car vibrating around all day, or worse, in a helicopter?

:J

Perhaps we should reserve judgment on that until the new camera ship and can be tested in those types of situations - rather than make assumptions based on no field testing of the concept.

If RED will offer a lock down, shimmed mount for you, which is your stated desire, and also a movable block model that uses interchangeable mounts, which would be the desire of the hordes of non-union, multiple genre, convergence shooters who will use the cameras, than that's no skin off your nose, right? Why not just order the locked down "rock solid" mount, and do your thing with it - and know that others who use Epic and Scarlet in different ways than you can also get a mount/block situation that will suit them also.

There are huge numbers of professional RED One users who don't shoot in the style you do. They use 35mm stills lenses, B4 2/3" lenses, and cine lenses as called for on a variety of productions types, they focus by eye, they often don't use matte boxes of follow focus, need a variety of lens types in their work, etc - but they're every bit as much customers of RED as you or any other traditional shooter is - and they're every bit as much professional too.

I like the interchangable by 4 bolts mount concept very much. I also like the moveable sensor block to quickly adjust back focus concept - that's the way I want my Epic and Scarlet cameras to be equipped - and since I was one of the very first buyers of RED One (serial number 0008 + two other extremely early shipping cameras), and I'll be receiving my Epic and Scarlet cameras before practically anyone else in the world, that's the way I plan to use those new cameras of mine.

In some of the genres I shoot, including over 18 months now with my RED One cameras, I consistently shoot in the most demanding climates (arctic, desert, tropics), mountings (boats, helicopters, cars), etc. - and I do want the interchangeable mounts and adjustable sensor block for back focus - because it increases the utility of the cameras, gives me a variety of lens type options in field use, and allows me the opportunity to generate more revenue with the cameras.

There's a diverse array of users of RED cameras - and everyone's needs aren't defined by a traditionalist cine style approach to equipment, setup, and accessories. To each their own...

 

[JonathanF]

There is a diverse array of users of RED cameras - and everyone's needs aren't defined by a traditionalist cine style approach. To each their own...

Which is why design should take into consideration users at the top end as well. If there ever was a camera that had the potential to displace film for feature production, Epic is it.

We can assume that the increased resolution and range of the sensors in the new cameras will likely amplify the mount issues some users who shoot with MP's and other fast high end cine glass experience under certain conditions.

I am in total agreement with you when you say that the real solution would be fixed mounts/sensors as an option or all the fancy whiz bang auto aligning sensor and interchangeable mount stuff as another option.

What I am getting at, which seems to provide endless fodder for some users, is that because of the enormous potential of the new Epic, it is our hope that serious stability and reliability features we see on very high end cameras like 535 and Millenium are incorporated into it's design. This would include a general propensity to favor simple and robust designs over convenience type features that _may_ compromise durability. 'To each their own,' implies you can have it both ways. Some of what you are advocating here would preclude me shooting the way I need to shoot. That's a problem.

There can be infinite numbers of additional options and configurations for people without these requirements, however incorporation of some of these features into the camera's base configuration could make the camera unsuitable for some applications thereby driving some at the high end to other solutions. This would be a shame because I have yet to see anything else with the potential of Epic if what's in the brochure is to be believed (and as we have seen with Jim, he generally does deliver).

If you need adjustable sensor blocks or adjustable mounts, order it. If not the bare bones model may be preferable. Just make it an option.

The principle issue I take with this feature is that it was not requested as an option. Because it has the potential to make the camera unusable for some users, perhaps a minority of users, but certainly those at the upper end for whom the camera is hopefully intended.

Your implication that major motion picture cinematographers are in the minority does not make the specifics of our requirements for a camera system any less valid than yours. It just makes them different.

My experience these past 16 years indicates there could be issues with such a feature and I think it would benefit us all to examine the technical reasons for why this may be the case.

Going on about serial numbers and number of camera systems owned doesn't really lend credibility to the argument. I'm pretty sure Vittorio Storraro doesn't own a RedOne but his opinion would matter a whole lot more than either of ours.

 

[Steve Gibby]

This would include a general propensity to favor simple and robust designs over convenience type features that _may_ compromise durability. 'To each their own,' implies you can have it both ways. Some of what you are advocating here would preclude me shooting the way I need to shoot. That's a problem.

Without the replaceable mount/adjustable sensor block design being fully revealed, much less shipped and field tested, there is no reason to assume it would not be durable and reliable in professional use. "To each their own" implies exactly what you agreed with me on - that having the option to either order the cameras with a traditional shimmed PL mount, or alternately with removable mounts and adjustable sensor block, gives each of us professionals the choice to equip the camera as we need for our field work - "to each their own" choice.

There can be infinite numbers of additional options and configurations for people without these requirements, however incorporation of some of these features into the camera's base configuration could make the camera unsuitable for some applications thereby driving some at the high end to other solutions. This would be a shame because I have yet to see anything else with the potential of Epic if what's in the brochure is to be believed (and as we have seen with Jim, he generally does deliver).

Again, let's not jump to a conclusion that some of the Epic and Scarlet design features will somehow compromise the camera's suitability for some applications, when the final designs have not been revealed, and more importantly no cameras have been field tested yet. Once the cameras have shipped and been used heavily on the set and in the field, we can draw some experienced and educated conclusions on their operational parameters, strengths, and weaknesses.

If you need adjustable sensor blocks or adjustable mounts, order it. If not the bare bones model may be preferable. Just make it an option.

Agreed...and I believe that is the direction RED will go, and should go on this. That said, RED is a company which honors camera tradition in many ways, but is entirely progressive in their thinking in other ways. They're not content to just make another run of the mill camera - they don't have a "what was good enough for my Pappy is good enough for me" approach. If they succeed in producing a rock solid mount system, which is durable, reliable, replaceable, and has an easily adjustable sensor block which is rock solid when its not being adjusted, then more power to them!

I love tradition - but I also love progression.


---------------------

From my archive of RED Team quotes, here are some Jim Jannard quotes since 11/22/08 on the subject of mounts, and mount features, for Epic and Scarlet:


"Most members and readers who've visited RED User for awhile know that I keep a pretty robust personal database of what RED Team members post here. I keep it in Word docs for my own reference, but occasionally copy paste those RED Team quotes on threads to help others see what RED Team has posted on a subject. I just visited my RED archive, and on the document for "Mounts", here are a collection of quotes by Jim Jannard since 11/22/08 on the subject of the DSMC camera mounts:

We posted a pic somewhere in this forum of the "mount module". Four bolts and it is off (or on). Backfocus is done at the sensor. So, you buy a PL mount module or a RED mount module... or, you get the picture. Since each lens type has a different BFL distance, we account for that in the mounts, which are precision machined. Lens mount change takes about one minute."

Jim
11/22/08
http://205.234.135.241/forum/showthread.php?t=22660



(When Jim asked if back focus would be adjustable in the field)

"Of course..."

Jim
(same thread)



"RED mounts are not PL mounts. No reason to duplicate a PL mount with a different name. The RED mount would be the equivalent to a Canon or Nikon mount for RED lenses.

If you are lucky, you can change mounts with no calibration of back-focus... like a RED ONE now. If it is needed, it should be very slight. Instead of the mount being adjustable, the sensor block is. It is really slick and solid.

If you own a Scarlet S35 brain and an EPIC S35 brain and use PL mounts, you will need one for each body."

Jim
(same thread)



"You can order any mount you want. The RED mount is a proprietary mount that works with RED lenses for full frame 35mm stills. It is an auto-focus, image stabilized program. Much like a stills Canon or Nikon lens program. Different than the RED PL mount series lenses that include the 18-85mm zoom."

Jim
(same thread)

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Which is why design should take into consideration users at the top end as well. If there ever was a camera that had the potential to displace film for feature production, Epic is it.

How do we know the design isn't squarely directed at the top end of the market? I'm thinking it is. We have no idea how it works just yet, how robust it really is, etc.. I'm intrigued and will reserve judgement until I see the final product -- as Gibby suggests.

The guys at RED are fanatical about making this as much of a pro camera system as possible. They know the shortcomings of their current mount system.

For an interchangeable mount system to be truly versatile, it needs a means to quickly swap mounts and set back-focus in the field. Going forward with this use in mind, a solid mount with shims is not the answer. I can't comment on the P+S IMS solution. I have never used it other than playing with it a bit on a tradeshow floor. I was impressed with it at the time.

RED is definitely open to options. They will be offering the PL mount and presumably others made from different materials to appease different needs. Perhaps a solid-mounted sensor block and rigid, shim-able mount is a potential option. I'm sure it will be if there is enough demand. But I doubt Jim / RED will offer such an option if people are wanting it purely out of uncertainty over their new system.

 

[JonathanF]

With that said, I have expressed my concerns and I'm sure they will be heard.

Belaboring the point in not of any benefit other than to say that waiting till we see the end product may be too late. I thought the whole point of this forum was to solicit input from real world users? I have 16 years of real world experience that certainly has some validity. I wouldn't just be talking out my backside, I promise.



:J

 

[Steve Gibby]

With that said, I have expressed my concerns and I'm sure they will be heard.

Belaboring the point in not of any benefit other than to say that waiting till we see the end product may be too late. I thought the whole point of this forum was to solicit input from real world users? I have 16 years of real world experience that certainly has some validity. I wouldn't just be talking out my backside, I promise.



:J

Yes, that is how this forum should function, and yes, RED has solicited input and suggestions. That said, at some point they have to complete the design for the cameras and get them into production - and they know no matter what they do, there will always be some unhappy people. There is no such thing as a perfect camera system, but as modular, flexible, and scalable as the EPIC/Scarlet designs are, they are all about diverse utility. If you aren't into that broad utility - well, just use them in what you do - they should still be fantastic tools for you.

I have 30+ years of real world experience - and I'm not talking out my backside either - I promise. :gun: