Birger Lens Mount Reservations

[David Nardini]

IS is awesome. shot with it our at Burning Man. shooting with it here while I travel the EU....

its awesome. I use it on my 17-55 and my 70-300

you hit the middle button then the top and bottom together. ( or vice versa) you hear the IS turn on.

mike

make sure you are wide open when you switch on IS on the lens (wont switch on otherwise) ... then adjust aperture to what you need ... then action :biggrin:

IS stays on all the time, unlike DSLR work (no idea if this affect things in the long term)

 

[Steven-Marc C.]

IS is awesome. shot with it our at Burning Man. shooting with it here while I travel the EU....

its awesome. I use it on my 17-55 and my 70-300

you hit the middle button then the top and bottom together. ( or vice versa) you hear the IS turn on.

mike

Sounds like you're still very happy with the mount after having been one of the very first to get one. That's encouraging. Whilst on your travels, are you using a FF or do you just focus with your hand on the lens barrel?

 

[Martin Weiss]

O.K. looks like the mount has not yet left the Birger Building.

Well, well.

 

[Frank Weeks]

Got my EF 16-35 f/1.2L II yesterday. I am having trouble with focus at the wide end. I can't get a clean image until I zoom to about 22-24mm. I spent severals hours last night trying to collinate the Birger, but still the soft image.I used Idill's method (P. 419) I looked on the Birger website but didn't see the software I have heard about. Any suggestions?

FWIW, the mound seems flush against the Red and I have not crimped the I cable.

Thanks

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

O.K. looks like the mount has not yet left the Birger Building.

Well, well.

Martin, well .... we seem to be all in the same boat. But small progress, nevertheless: Whenever the mounts are ready, we should be in the next batch.

Once I've now had time to get over the dissapointment, have realized that likely neither Erik and Amy feel proud of the situation. I'm sure this is not how they had planned how things will go, but for some reason the communication between Birger and this community has escaped on this kind of path nobody feels good about. For me the bit akward thing is that I've lost twice some money as have relied on the information given by Birger. The first time was in March (phone call with Erik) and the same happened last week again (email from Amy). But ... such is life.

Hopefully Birger manages to straigthen their production soon and before Andy starts to ship his mounts in volumes. For, when Andy starts to ship his mount, he will have a display and knob and at that point it's likely that not everybody who've followed this thread for almost a year will be excited enough to wait for the Birger mount, and/or knob and wireless control.

Perhaps should quote a person posting on this forum but slightly edit his words and say: good mount production and waiting for everybody.

 

[Joe Vinson]

I collimated to zero as well, and I think I'm just barely hitting infinity focus on my wider lenses.

 

[Harmonica]

It's kinda silly to be thinking about the next step with Epic when I've shot very little with my One, but I am planning to get the PL mount with the Epic and use my Birger mount when Erik comes up with an adapter. Remember, the Red One adapter is only $300!

 

[Frank Weeks]

I've got the same issue. My mount is switched to PL right now, but I'd like to test further. I can't seem to get any really wide lens to hit infinity properly. I've removed the collimation ring entirely so it's completely flush.

It's still usable for most lenses and eye focusing, but it's not really right. Just barely off. I think the mount may be too thick. Worst case scenario I'll have a machine shop grind it down a tiny bit... but I'd rather hear from Erik on it and I don't want to void my warranty.

Thanks for the response

To be clear, I am not getting anywhere close at 16mm. If I hold my hand 12-18 inches in front of the lens, it is focused but at five feet it is useless. The lens works perfectly on my still camera. The mount appears to work well with some of my cheaper Zooms.

I feel like I must be doing something wrong. Is anyone else using the EF 16-35 f/1.2L II USM with the Birger mount? How well is it performing?

I know Erik has discussed the proper way to collimate but I have misplaced it.

Where is the software (mac or PC) to help collimate?

Thanks for any help.

 

[Steve Murray]

Huge problem

Huge problem

But my Tokina 11-16mm has a hard stop at infinity and it's way out. I thought it was the lens, but it appears to be OK on a SLR.

OK, this is a HUGE problem. The wider the lens the more critical the BF / collimation is. You will probably find that most lenses longer than 24mm will focus but not being able to use wide zooms is a very big problem. If the Canon 10-22mm and the Tokina 11-16mm wide zoom lenses are not sharp at 10 & 11mm and the mount cannot be adjusted anymore...... then the mount is worthless for shooting with wide lenses.

Have you guys tried going the other way with the mount adjustment? Farther away from the camera? When you are this wide the point of sharpness is very precise and you could easily pass it. Especially when freaking out that is does not seem to work...

I think you will find that if you use your widest lens to set the mount from the start then all other lenses will be fine. That is why this is such a big deal IF it will not adjust for these wide zoom lenses.

I'm confused... after all these posts, after all this time waiting, why are we just now hearing about this? Has something changed from the first mounts that were shipped to the last few? Have any of you guys who got the first 30 mounts not had this problem? No one else shooting super wide with the Birger until now?

 

[NuclearNerd]

So is Erik involved at all in the new lens interfaces for Epic and Scarlet?

no...

That seems odd. Even if you wanted to bypass Birger's...inconsistent...manufacturing, I would think that the quickest path to adding Canon compatibility to Epic and Scarlet would be to buy / license Eric's code. I bet reverse engineering the protocols will be harder work than Red imagines (though at least they aren't promising delivery dates).

 

[Joe Vinson]

Have you guys tried going the other way with the mount adjustment? Farther away from the camera?

Major caveats: I never had to collimate anything before attaching my mount (still only barely understand the practice); I don't own any special collimation tools (just trial and error with a few lenses); and I tried to to do as little digging around with the sensor exposed as possible (dry skin, I generate a lot of dust). But from my experience, there was a clear correlation between higher shim numbers and bad focus. Not only reaching infinity on the wider lenses, but also matching the distance with the focus marks to the actual distance.

In theory most people should be getting perfect backfocus in the mid-range of collimation options, so the scattershot of higher and lower figures would be within reasonable tolerances. If a lot of us are bottoming out at zero, does that mean the mount is a little too thick?

 

[Paris Remillard]

Seriously, Erik, give us some kind of update. Your last post was 3 full weeks ago. There is obviously a problem, so just let us know what it is.

 

[Jason Ing]

That seems odd. Even if you wanted to bypass Birger's...inconsistent...manufacturing, I would think that the quickest path to adding Canon compatibility to Epic and Scarlet would be to buy / license Eric's code. I bet reverse engineering the protocols will be harder work than Red imagines (though at least they aren't promising delivery dates).

Considering Red's track record with making incredible things happen (and the fact that there are others out there that have engineering mount experience), Red won't have a problem at all.

And Red probably didn't want to depend on Erik. They've got a schedule to meet. lol.

 

[lonny dill]

Canon Wide Primes and Depth of field

Canon Wide Primes and Depth of field

Got my EF 16-35 f/1.2L II yesterday. I am having trouble with focus at the wide end. I can't get a clean image until I zoom to about 22-24mm. I spent severals hours last night trying to collinate the Birger, but still the soft image.I used Idill's method (P. 419) I looked on the Birger website but didn't see the software I have heard about. Any suggestions?

FWIW, the mound seems flush against the Red and I have not crimped the I cable.

Thanks

I have been working with my 14mm and 24mm L-series primes for most of the morning. The Canon glass is great, but the depth of field may be too narrow in low light conditions for achieving infinity focus and keeping foreground sharp. After moving outside in full sun, the depth of field grew larger as we stopped down. To get a wider depth of field inside one will surely need to increase light on the set while using these lenses.

Our plans were to use our steady cam set-up with Red and a 14mm Canon, but we cannot seem to achieve a wide enough depth of field to make the shots look good without blasting the set with light. I know there is a better solution out there, and it is probably a $65,000 lens. I would love anyone else's input or suggestions.

Help

 

[Frank Weeks]

Thank Lonny

My problems are not shallow depth of field but no clean focus at all between 16-21mm.

Again I don't know if my collimation is correct at this point because I had waited until I got the 16-35 before attempting collimation. I did not find any setting that provided decent focus at the wide end. I will try again this weekend.

Still wondering what happened to the collimation software.

 

[Martin Weiss]

A more expensive 10mm lens will not give you a different depth of field at any given t-stop than the cheapest banged up 10mm lens from eBay will at the same t-stop.

It's physics. A more expensive lens will give you many other good things, dof is not one of them.

 

[Steve Murray]

. But from my experience, there was a clear correlation between higher shim numbers and bad focus. Not only reaching infinity on the wider lenses, but also matching the distance with the focus marks to the actual distance.

In theory most people should be getting perfect back focus in the mid-range of collimation options, so the scatter shot of higher and lower figures would be within reasonable tolerances. If a lot of us are bottoming out at zero, does that mean the mount is a little too thick?

Yes, something is NOT right with the mount if you cannot get it adjusted with a wide lens. And yes I agree there should still be a little more adjustment left after you set it with a 10 or 11mm lens. Medium and longer lenses will probably focus where you have it set, yes?

 

[Stephen Williams]

A more expensive 10mm lens will not give you a different depth of field at any given t-stop than the cheapest banged up 10mm lens from eBay will at the same t-stop.

It's physics. A more expensive lens will give you many other good things, dof is not one of them.

Hi,

Not totally true, a lens with a very poor resolving power will show greater dof than very sharp lens.
One of the reasons many video cameras appear to give unlimited DOF, nothing at all is actually sharp.

Stephen

 

[lonny dill]

Faster lenses allow a Greater F-stop & bigger DOF

Faster lenses allow a Greater F-stop & bigger DOF

A more expensive 10mm lens will not give you a different depth of field at any given t-stop than the cheapest banged up 10mm lens from eBay will at the same t-stop.

It's physics. A more expensive lens will give you many other good things, dof is not one of them.

My 14mm is a 2.8 which is not all that fast. I was thinking of a super fast lens and increasing my F-stop to achieve a greater dof. Usually the faster the lens the more money out of your pocket. ??? I love having all you guys out there. It is so cool to get help within minutes.
Lonny

 

[Jason Ing]

My 14mm is a 2.8 which is not all that fast. I was thinking of a super fast lens and increasing my F-stop to achieve a greater dof. Usually the faster the lens the more money out of your pocket. ??? I love having all you guys out there. It is so cool to get help within minutes.
Lonny

If you want deeper DOF, a "fast" lens isn't what you need.

A fast lens has a large aperture... 1.8, 1.2... 1.0. It's for low light conditions in which you open up your aperture to capture as much light as possible. And if you do that, you have a shallow DOF.

To achieve greater DOF, you have to close down your aperture.

Or am I not understanding something?