How could they tell you installed a Birger?

[Rob Ruffo]

Here is a question:

It seems to me, and anyone please correct me if I am wrong, that there is no way to tell whether a Red cam has ever had a Birger mount installed on it or not, assuming said installation was performed carefully. You can simply replace the origianl PL Mount, and none coudl ever be the wiser. The camera woudl be identical to its previous state, at least identical to how it woudl look if it had instead been outfitted with Red's approved Nikon mount.

I am not advocating dishonest behavior, but it seems a valid question.

Now I understand that if you screwed-up, and damaged your Red installing a Birger, or the Birger itself screwed up and damaged the Red, then that SHOULD void your warranty. If it ever did not, that was extraordinary generosity on the part of RED, but if no Birger-related damage is done by installation, I don't see the logic.

What really peeves me is that now I have to suffer, as a Red user, because the owner of Birger lacks interpersonal and business skills to such an outrageous extent that Red management just couldn't take it anymore. Couldn't they punish him in some other way, some way that doesn't also punish me, the user?

I've worked with engineers, and some (I don't know any specifics here, I'm not actually commenting on Birger in any way) are so personally unpleasant and clueless about how to deal with people that it's torture to have to interact with them. You feel offfended, depressed, frsutrated, it's just awful shrink-wrapped in more awful. But that's how they are, and as s society we deeply need their skills.

 

[Jeff Coatney]

One way is if you advertise that you want one .

 

[Rob Ruffo]

No, I don't. I would never do something so stupid as voiding my warranty,

 

[Jeff Coatney]

Just kidding.

They should be able to detect if the mount has been removed. There's four ways I know about.

1. Comparing the current set-screw torque to it's factory assembly records.

2. Comparing the set-screw head position to the high resolution photo taken of the finished mount before it left the factory. Nearly impossible to match perfectly the head position after re-installation.

3. Evidence of dust or fingerprints on the internal parts of the mount. (These things are assembled in a clean room) It will be virtually impossible to not introduce contamination during a mount swap.

4. Evidence of microscopic metal particles from the Birger that transfer onto the body or factory mount. Easily detectable using test gear.

Trying to eliminate any of this evidence will result in leaving cleaning residue on the parts that may not be originally present-- another tell-tale sign.

There may also be temper-evident countermeasures that I'm not aware of.

 

[Lewis-M Soucy]

"Tweetweetweetweetweetweetweetweetwee..." (Las Vegas CSI theme song...)

 

[Rob Ruffo]

Just kidding.

They should be able to detect if the mount has been removed. There's four ways I know about.

1. Comparing the current set-screw torque to it's factory assembly records.

2. Comparing the set-screw head position to the high resolution photo taken of the finished mount before it left the factory. Nearly impossible to match perfectly the head position after re-installation.

3. Evidence of dust or fingerprints on the internal parts of the mount. (These things are assembled in a clean room) It will be virtually impossible to not introduce contamination during a mount swap.

4. Evidence of microscopic metal particles from the Birger that transfer onto the body or factory mount. Easily detectable using test gear.

Trying to eliminate any of this evidence will result in leaving cleaning residue on the parts that may not be originally present-- another tell-tale sign.

There may also be temper-evident countermeasures that I'm not aware of.

But wouldn't these all be affected in the same way by an approved mount?

Also - don't you think a new "if you damage your cam with a Birger mount, that damage is not covered by warranty and tech support cannot help you" be a more reasonable approach for Red, rather than this new position, which seems more like an emotional - and dare I say unprofessional - reaction to Birger?

 

[Michael Hastings]

[

What really peeves me is that now I have to suffer, as a Red user, because the owner of Birger lacks interpersonal and business skills to such an outrageous extent that Red management just couldn't take it anymore.

Where do you get this? I have been pretty closely involved with this situation since the very first cameras were shipped. I am very hesitant to make any more waves because in the long run I need RED more than I need Birger, but I also have some personal integrity and as such I can't just watch this go by.

Without some serious backup your representation may not be quite libelous but it is certainly unfair and over the top.

Erik definitely had his problems reengineering his mount, after RED radically and suddenly changed their mount because of problems with the original pl mount - AND after Birger had announced a schedule and begun taking orders. And Erik/Birger was heavily hammered in the Birger thread (and deserved a fair amount of it) but I could point out a number of examples in pretty much every area where RED has done the same kind of things or worse. I don't like calling out either one of them very heavily because they both suffered growing pains and in the end they also achieved something pretty darn cool.

I wish bygones could be bygones. And I think, unless you have something more substantial than Jarred's vague comments to go on, you should reconsider how you framed that representation, because, at the risk of annoying RED I have to say that I do know things that very few others know - and neither side is lily white in this situation.

As far as the basic thread question: In the end it just isn't that difficult or dangerous or damaging to install a Birger or any other mount - the RED mounting face is about as simple as it gets so you would have to be really incompetent to damage the OLPF (you don't get anywhere near the actual sensor) and although the i-cable isn't very robust it isn't that difficult to deal with either. And BTW I would suggest that the actual Birger mount (not necessarily the viewfactor impero) is as well or better engineered as anything RED has put out up until maybe the Red Pro Primes.

Canon EF with a Birger mount offers such phenomenal and cost effective lens capability that if RED/Jim/Jarred continue to hold a grudge and/or overplay the relatively minor difficulties it may create for them, they simply aren't looking out for the best interests of a large segment of their customers - you, me, the people to whom I have recommended RED/Birger and the thousands of soon to be Epic upgrades where they will have the R1 as a second camera or sell it to even more budget minded endusers - both of which are ideal for a Birger-like solution.

RED has announced a smart mount for canon with epic but presumably the "smarts" are in the brains itself so that doesn't necessarily translate to a product for R1. And it is hard to see how it would be much different/better than Birger because the design limitations are inherent to the R1 itself and the Canon flange focal distance.

Ultimately, I hope RED reevaluates their policy - at least so far as R1s already out of warranty and that will become stage 2 upgrades rather than tradeins - which would make the essence of this thread unnecessary.

 

[Jeff Coatney]

But wouldn't these all be affected in the same way by an approved mount?

Yes, but what if they ask you to provide the mount and you don't have one to show or even a receipt?

You'd be cold busted in their eyes.

 

[Lewis-M Soucy]

I'd say wait for Epic before doing something silly. Or just plain take responsibility for the mount install.

It's not our business to judge and we're not even close to understand what the whole thing is about. That's Red's and Birger's affair.

I understand the pain, I was really amazed by that mount too and was looking into it long before it was released. It kills the warranty, I didn't want to risk that and stayed with my PL mount, period.

If I remember well, Sanjin has used it for years and is well happy with it. I think he's one of the first to have used it and taken his own responsibility.

It's not a coin flip decision. Either you have a use for it, and go for it, or you can do without and keep your Red the way it is. There are plenty of other mounts that are approved. That's how the game is as of now.

 

[Stephen Williams]

I have seen plenty of cameras with non approved mounts, from major rental companies. Interested to see what happens, I guess they will all go for Stage 1/2 & Red will never see their cameras.

 

[Jay A. Kelley]

I have to say, this is a very painful subject. Most people do not speak their minds about this issue out of fear.

This is a horrible thing, it's not what we're supposed to be about here.

Business, like war, can be an ugly thing sometimes.

Jay

 

[Michael Hastings]

I have to say, this is a very painful subject. Most people do not speak their minds about this issue out of fear.

This is a horrible thing, it's not what we're supposed to be about here.

Business, like war, can be an ugly thing sometimes.

Jay

Well said, Jay - it's painful for me too, as I've said on another thread.

...There are plenty of other mounts that are approved. That's how the game is as of now.

What other approved smart mounts are there?

I have seen plenty of cameras with non approved mounts, from major rental companies. Interested to see what happens, I guess they will all go for Stage 1/2 & Red will never see their cameras.

But according to Jarred's posts they lose their trade in or stage 2 discounts, regardless of whether RED gets the R1 back or not - or are you implying there will be selective enforcement? And what's the legality of it if "Red will never see their cameras."?

 

[Martin Weiss]

There are plenty of other mounts that are approved.

Unfortunately, as far as Canon glass goes, there is only the Alesniak mount, which was the first one to be approved. Unfortunately, they have been totally quiet for the past year or so, so I do not know if they even still produce the mounts. I have both their and the Birger canon mount as a dumb version, and the Birger mount is of a superior build quality. (Think: plastic versus quality metal.)

 

[Mitch Gross]

Sanjin uses the P+S IMS mount, which is also not approved.

Attaching the Birger mount is a little more than other mounts, but not much. RED doesn't say that you void the warranty if you choose to disassemble and then reassemble your own mount, such as if you wish to check the torque on the bolts or adjust centering. So they would have no way of knowing if you were adjusting your own mount or removing it to install another.

Except that you'll let out the magic pixie dust and the hamster will get off his wheel and run out.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Except that you'll let out the magic pixie dust and the hamster will get off his wheel and run out.

Now you've done it - why do you think I've been saying I can't tell the whole story - and now EVERYBODY knows! :biggrin:

 

[christopher witzke]

I've been under the impression that RED's only concern with the Birger mount is when the ipin is attached.... so I've never bother attaching mine from the camera to the mount. I don't get lens data, but I do have the ability to count iris clicks and not really need the focus distance info.

 

[Rob Ruffo]

[

Where do you get this? I have been pretty closely involved with this situation since the very first cameras were shipped. I am very hesitant to make any more waves because in the long run I need RED more than I need Birger, but I also have some personal integrity and as such I can't just watch this go by.

Without some serious backup your representation may not be quite libelous but it is certainly unfair and over the top.

Erik definitely had his problems reengineering his mount, after RED radically and suddenly changed their mount because of problems with the original pl mount - AND after Birger had announced a schedule and begun taking orders. And Erik/Birger was heavily hammered in the Birger thread (and deserved a fair amount of it) but I could point out a number of examples in pretty much every area where RED has done the same kind of things or worse. I don't like calling out either one of them very heavily because they both suffered growing pains and in the end they also achieved something pretty darn cool.

I wish bygones could be bygones. And I think, unless you have something more substantial than Jarred's vague comments to go on, you should reconsider how you framed that representation, because, at the risk of annoying RED I have to say that I do know things that very few others know - and neither side is lily white in this situation.

As far as the basic thread question: In the end it just isn't that difficult or dangerous or damaging to install a Birger or any other mount - the RED mounting face is about as simple as it gets so you would have to be really incompetent to damage the OLPF (you don't get anywhere near the actual sensor) and although the i-cable isn't very robust it isn't that difficult to deal with either. And BTW I would suggest that the actual Birger mount (not necessarily the viewfactor impero) is as well or better engineered as anything RED has put out up until maybe the Red Pro Primes.

Canon EF with a Birger mount offers such phenomenal and cost effective lens capability that if RED/Jim/Jarred continue to hold a grudge and/or overplay the relatively minor difficulties it may create for them, they simply aren't looking out for the best interests of a large segment of their customers - you, me, the people to whom I have recommended RED/Birger and the thousands of soon to be Epic upgrades where they will have the R1 as a second camera or sell it to even more budget minded endusers - both of which are ideal for a Birger-like solution.

RED has announced a smart mount for canon with epic but presumably the "smarts" are in the brains itself so that doesn't necessarily translate to a product for R1. And it is hard to see how it would be much different/better than Birger because the design limitations are inherent to the R1 itself and the Canon flange focal distance.

Ultimately, I hope RED reevaluates their policy - at least so far as R1s already out of warranty and that will become stage 2 upgrades rather than tradeins - which would make the essence of this thread unnecessary.

I said that provocative statement hoping that someone such as yourself would come forward and chime in with the other side of the story, which I wanted to hear. I only had Jared's vague statements to base myself on, nothing more (to my credit I did not claim it was more than subjective interpretation of those vague statements.)
I think Red + Birger is a much more appealing and useful product to many of us than Red without Birger. It's not just a matter of money. Steadicam ops don't need/want more weight past a certain number, as otherwise fatigue sets in sooner (for every extra ounce put up-front with a heavy PL mount lens, there must be the same weight added to the back to compensate). Some of us also often treck pretty far on foot to get our shots. At many focals lengths, only L glass can get you pristine quality without the weight.

Using Inclino with Birger is really quite dreamlike, and much less prone to problems than using it with an outside motor.

It's true, Red nonetheles has no equal, but the low-cost high quality low-weight solution that was offered via Birger meant that many people here were considering the combo of Red with L lenses for purchase rather than just rental - it was just too cool - they just had to have it. Now I would imagine that number has gone down at least a bit.

 

[Lewis-M Soucy]

Sanjin uses the P+S IMS mount, which is also not approved.

Right, thanks Mitch. I was vaguely recalling from a year plus very old thread about the warranty voiding mounts... I just remembered he did swap his mount permanently and was very happy with it.

Anyway, yes, it's a painful subject, and again, I'd say wait for Epic. We're months away... I own my PL glass, so I'm not concerned, but I second the glass budget and weight issues are a big argument in this blocked situation.

 

[Jarred Land]

So they would have no way of knowing if you were adjusting your own mount or removing it to install another.

This is an incorrect statement.. I am surprised to hear it come from Mitch, but regardless, it is incorrect

Dont worry guys.. I know alot of you are disappointed. That disappointment the first time around made me bend the warranty rules to let it slide.. and unfortunately that didn't work out so well, so we had to close the door again.

 

[Rob Ruffo]

My point here was to flesh-out the other side of the story. The "How can they tell" part was just to get more eyeballs, and maybe get a more technical explanation of why Birger mounts are basically blocked by Red. I am also not taking sides in any way, I just think that both sides of any story should always be heard.