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 :)

Birger Nikon Mount Inferior to Birger Canon Mount?

B

Bill Goehring

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
428
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Hey Erik,

Stephen Pruitt says that you mentioned in a conversation with him that you're convinced "most people who end up buying the Nikon mount will eventually want to buy the Canon version."

Does this mean that you think Nikkor AF-S optics are inherently inferior to Canon optics in general, only with respect to your electronic interface, or something else entirely?

Please, by all means, spill it. Even if I'm unable to leverage my Nikon still system optics with RED ONE usage, I'd still consider going Canon, especially considering that my D2X is becoming long in the tooth and I'm currently considering updating my Nikon lenses to AF-S models for use with the Birger Nikon Mount. I had been thinking that the Nikkor line, with more discreet focusing steps than the Canons, as we've heard, could wind up being the better of the two, so I'm confused.

Help me to avoid a hasty re-investment in new Nikon lenses, along with an investment in your Nikon mount. Considering that I could probably have the Canon mount sooner than a Nikon version anyway, I'd like to know now to avoid playing musical chairs with the Nikon, Canon and Birger gear.
 
BillG said:
Hey Erik,

Stephen Pruitt says that you mentioned in a conversation with him that you're convinced "most people who end up buying the Nikon mount will eventually want to buy the Canon version."
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that Erik has actually uttered those exact words, but who knows. However, if the Birger Nikon mount's performance turns out to be substantially inferior to the canon mount, that would only reflect badly on Birger's ability to produce a good product for Nikon glass, not on Nikon glass itself. In that case, instead of going canon, I'd look elsewhere for a smart Nikon mount. The only other glass I'd change Nikon for is Leica, but that's another story. To me, canon and nikon are not interchangeable; They're different in my eyes, and I prefer Nikon.
Jim, has dropped some hints that 2 other people are working on a smart Nikon mount as well. I suspect one of them is ViewfactorStudios, and that would guarantee one hell of a good product, but I'm just speculating.
All in all, I have a lot of faith in Erik, so let's just let him do his thing and wait.
 
I KNEW I shouldn't have opened my mouth. Sorry, Erik. . .

:-(

As a point of fact, Erik said that he was going to be putting out an announcement soon about this issue because he wants everyone to know exactly what the situation is regarding both systems.

For the record he was both a gentleman and a scholar.

Stephen
 
Sorry, Stephen. I'd like to think I'm a gentleman and a scholar as well, but I'd have to admit to being PARANOID too, especially when it comes to laying out thousands in cash.
 
Hmmmm, if Erik does not explain what is going on I may cancel the
order and forget the whole thing.
 
Canon Nikon

Canon Nikon

BillG said:
Hey Erik,

Stephen Pruitt says that you mentioned in a conversation with him that you're convinced "most people who end up buying the Nikon mount will eventually want to buy the Canon version."

Does this mean that you think Nikkor AF-S optics are inherently inferior to Canon optics in general, only with respect to your electronic interface, or something else entirely?
Click to expand...

I highly doubt it is because he thinks nikkor are inferior - while one can argue over slight differences - who is better in the overall quality of the entire line; or one is better for wide angles the other is better for teles; or whose color renditions are "better", more artistic, etc.; but no informed person would suggest that either line is "inferior".

I know one of the reasons they developed the Canon mount/controller originally (several years ago for the scientific/industrial market) was that all EF and EF-S lenses use motors for iris and focus - while many Nikkors use a mechanical drive which is 1) a bit harder to develop as their is more fussy mechanical engineering involved and 2) it just might be that it is easier to control or "map" the focus range to a wider/smoother range on the follow focus knob with the motor drives.

From a Nikon D40 review:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/

"Perhaps the biggest negative on the D40 is that it doesn't have an internal focus drive motor... F1.8D (and the F1.4D) are manual focus only on the D40... images below show the difference between the mount on the D40 and D80, the D80 has a mechanical focus drive pin..."


Just imagine the precision you have to have to manipulate a tiny pin to accurately adjust focus in milliseconds. Maybe not that hard to do to if you are making thousands of Nikon bodies, but not that easy if you are making just a few hundred clone mounts for REDs. Obviously it isn't trivial as Nikon left it off of their own entry level DSLR.

Add to this the fact that because of the Flange focal distances you can easily use Nikon lenses in manual mode with a simple, low cost, readily available mechanical adapter - but you can't use Canon lenses on Nikon at all (or at least it would take a complicated mechanical/optical adapter). In fact, I am looking at buying the old Fisheye Nikkor 8mm to use with my Birger Canon mount with a $40 mechanical Nikon to EOS adapter - since it is about $5K cheaper than a used one in PL mount.

Maybe he just feels that overall the Canon mount will be a smoother, more versatile system.

I don't know, just a WAG - wild ass guess - but I would certainly let Erik weigh in before you either invest in new lenses or panic over any of it. The deposit is refundable at any time and I imagine he would let you switch to the other mount as well.
 
AquaVideoRed206 said:
Just imagine the precision you have to have to manipulate a tiny pin to accurately adjust focus in milliseconds.
Click to expand...

I think Erik said he's not supporting the mechanical pin autofocus so developing for that won't slow him down.

I just think ordering the Canon makes sense because we know they have a lot more experience with it. Now when the Nikon comes along perhaps owning that would make sense too. At this point we haven't seen a real test of anything ... so I'm still hoping all will go as planned. I'm rooting for him because it should make RED a lot more fun for me.
 
Hey there, Bill. . .

I wasn't implying that you aren't a gentleman and a scholar, as well. I was just saying that Erik was incredibly nice to take the time to talk to me about the system and gave me some good insight as to what I'd like to do. He didn't have to do that.

So, fear not, as far as I'm concerned, until further notice, we're all gentleman (and ladies!) and scholars around here.

Stephen "Gentleman and Scholar" Pruitt, Ph.D.
 
jaadgy akanni said:
I seriously doubt that Erik has actually uttered those exact words, but who knows. However, if the Birger Nikon mount's performance turns out to be substantially inferior to the canon mount, that would only reflect badly on Birger's ability to produce a good product for Nikon glass, not on Nikon glass itself. In that case, instead of going canon, I'd look elsewhere for a smart Nikon mount. The only other glass I'd change Nikon for is Leica, but that's another story. To me, canon and nikon are not interchangeable; They're different in my eyes, and I prefer Nikon.
Jim, has dropped some hints that 2 other people are working on a smart Nikon mount as well. I suspect one of them is ViewfactorStudios, and that would guarantee one hell of a good product, but I'm just speculating.
All in all, I have a lot of faith in Erik, so let's just let him do his thing and wait.
Click to expand...

Actually, I probably utterred those exact words to Bill. The problem with the Nikon mount is not the mount itself, but rather the availability of AF-S Prime lenses from Nikon. This is a result of decisions that Nikon has made of the years to maintain some limited notion of backward compatibility across the f-mount. I will post a little later with a new thread that is my complete answer on what each of the different lens mounts offer for strengths and weaknesses.

Jim did not drop a hint that two other companies were working on a SMART nikon lens mount, but simply that two other companies were working on a Nikon lens mount. I assume he meant Birger and khmuse. We have no intention of coming out with a dumb nikon lens mount. This is a strategic decision that we have made, as it does not make sens to me to come out with a feature milited product a few months earlier.
 
Thanks for clearing that up, Erik.

Of course, I'm already well informed on the limited availability of Nikkor AF-S lenses. But I have already come to terms with that and, besides, I can cover almost all of my needs with three or four Nikkor AF-S zooms that are either already available or soon will be.
 
AquaVideoRed206 said:
I highly doubt it is because he thinks nikkor are inferior - while one can argue over slight differences - who is better in the overall quality of the entire line; or one is better for wide angles the other is better for teles; or whose color renditions are "better", more artistic, etc.; but no informed person would suggest that either line is "inferior".

I know one of the reasons they developed the Canon mount/controller originally (several years ago for the scientific/industrial market) was that all EF and EF-S lenses use motors for iris and focus - while many Nikkors use a mechanical drive which is 1) a bit harder to develop as their is more fussy mechanical engineering involved and 2) it just might be that it is easier to control or "map" the focus range to a wider/smoother range on the follow focus knob with the motor drives.

From a Nikon D40 review:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/

"Perhaps the biggest negative on the D40 is that it doesn't have an internal focus drive motor... F1.8D (and the F1.4D) are manual focus only on the D40... images below show the difference between the mount on the D40 and D80, the D80 has a mechanical focus drive pin..."


Just imagine the precision you have to have to manipulate a tiny pin to accurately adjust focus in milliseconds. Maybe not that hard to do to if you are making thousands of Nikon bodies, but not that easy if you are making just a few hundred clone mounts for REDs. Obviously it isn't trivial as Nikon left it off of their own entry level DSLR.

Add to this the fact that because of the Flange focal distances you can easily use Nikon lenses in manual mode with a simple, low cost, readily available mechanical adapter - but you can't use Canon lenses on Nikon at all (or at least it would take a complicated mechanical/optical adapter). In fact, I am looking at buying the old Fisheye Nikkor 8mm to use with my Birger Canon mount with a $40 mechanical Nikon to EOS adapter - since it is about $5K cheaper than a used one in PL mount.

Maybe he just feels that overall the Canon mount will be a smoother, more versatile system.

I don't know, just a WAG - wild ass guess - but I would certainly let Erik weigh in before you either invest in new lenses or panic over any of it. The deposit is refundable at any time and I imagine he would let you switch to the other mount as well.
Click to expand...

Those 8mm Nikons are fairly rare. Here's a nice one.
And the conversion makes it focus cinewise.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikkor-Fish-Eye...ryZ30077QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
 
BillG said:
Thanks for clearing that up, Erik.

Of course, I'm already well informed on the limited availability of Nikkor AF-S lenses. But I have already come to terms with that and, besides, I can cover almost all of my needs with three or four Nikkor AF-S zooms that are either already available or soon will be.
Click to expand...

Exactly my position. The Nikon AF-s in existence will cover all my needs. I already have an order for the new Full-frame 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm, all of which make excellent variable primes. I'll use my Ais prime collection with the manual mount and a RedRock FF.

Erik, I see I had misunderstood your statement before. Thanks for clearing that up.
 
BillG said:
Of course, I'm already well informed on the limited availability of Nikkor AF-S lenses. But I have already come to terms with that and, besides, I can cover almost all of my needs with three or four Nikkor AF-S zooms that are either already available or soon will be.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the issue. The zoom lenses are f/2.8. At some point in the future you will need all the light you can get, and an f/1.2 prime will be attractive because it will give you 5 times as much light. With the nilon mount, you will have to use an external follow focus, and give up on the remote control and the the meta-data for use in post. With the Canon, it is a $50/day lens rental, and none of the workflow changes. Even if/when Nikon comes out with all AF-S primes, it will be some time until they are available at rental houses.

What I actaully said on the phone was this "I will be holding a reserve on all of the nikon mounts that we ship assuming that I will get a phone call one day saying "I really wish I bought a canon mount", and to save a disappointed customer we will allow a trade in of that Nikon mount, on most reasonable terms for that Canon mount."

In my mind, the Nikon mount is only a transitional product. I believe once the lens mount system becomes an integral part of the workflow, the shortcomings of the Nikon lenses in all ways but optical, will overcome any of the perceived advantage of the lenses optically. If Nikon came out with a full set of AF-S primes, it would be a very different story.
 
Hmm...(wheels turning). I appreciate your reiteration and will consider it carefully--especially before I put out for those new AF-S optics.

The complication for me at this point is that I already have an investment in a Nikon still system--not a huge investment, but one that made cross-purposing lenses for stills and digital cinema attractive in the first place.

By the way, Erik, while we did talk on the phone last week, I don't think we discussed this issue. That was Stephen Pruitt.
 
BillG said:
Hmm...(wheels turning). I appreciate your reiteration and will consider it carefully--especially before I put out for those new AF-S optics.
Click to expand...

Bill you have stated the most important thing, that I will steal as my advice. Please do not buy a stockpile of lenses until we, and the greater community that is reduser, offer some test data. Not all lenses are created equal for this purpose.

There is no shortage of lenses. 3000 cameras is not going to suddenly create a shortage of SLR lenses! (except for maybe the 200mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.0 that are no longer in production).

The beauty of SLR lenses is they are manufactured in high enough volumes that there will not be any effect on supply. I have customers with 25 identical lenses on a single aircraft, and even when outfitting multiple flight vehicles, never have any trouble buying lenses!
 
thanks for the tip

thanks for the tip

chuck colburn said:
Those 8mm Nikons are fairly rare. Here's a nice one.
And the conversion makes it focus cinewise.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikkor-Fish-Eye...ryZ30077QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Click to expand...

I have some concern about changing mounts without real professional help (not mechanically but use of collimators and such to get it backfocused properly) and I am looking at using primarily the Canon lenses. I think there are two of the Nikon mount fisheye nikkor in an ebay store for about $2500 so that difference more than pays for an alternative mount and some high quality adapters. I think if the Canon mount were dialed in properly and I put the Nikon EOS adapter on the fisheye - lock it down and leave it - it could work pretty well.

Not too concerned about smooth focus or a cine direction focus ring on an 8mm. My use would primarily be underwater or a specialty shot on the surface where racking focus wouldn't be necessary.
 
I've used the Oppenhiemer converted 8 a lot. It being built here in Seattle by Don the lens tech at Openhiemmer. They are great conversions, but pricey, and it's very scary to have that big chunk of glass just floating out there. A better value for the owner op would be a 8mm pPerling, or a new digital still WA.

_mike
 
Hi Mike,

Are the mechanics of the Oppy conversion nice? And is the focus scale expanded, not that it's much of a concern at that focale lengh. Don't be scared it's just a piece of equipment and it's expendable... if you got insurance. lol
 
Yes they are very well built. The machine shop thee is pretty great.

My fear was never about paying for it, or wrecking it. It was having to tell Oppenheimer I broke one of his prized conversions. He got the idea to do the conversions when he got a killer deal on every New/Old stock 8mm on the planet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top