element technica breakout box first look...

[Jarred Land]

"Why won't Red just admit they put the wrong connectors on the camera? I find it hard to get excited about a box that fixes a design flaw."

I wouldnt call it a design flaw.. since at the time it was a requirement for mechanical constraints... and macleod I'd like to know who at Red is saying that mini-bnc's are better then full size BNC's....... pm me.

Its been our number one complaint since day one, which is why we are so excited about helping breed solutions. People should just be happy that for full size lovers there is an option, just because it didnt directly come from us doesnt mean the solution should be discarded.

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

the breakout box looks sickk

 

[C.H.Haskell]

This looks like a fantastic option...keep em coming.

 

[Wes Printz]

which is why we are so excited about helping breed solutions. People should just be happy that for full size lovers there is an option, just because it didnt directly come from us doesnt mean the solution should be discarded.

This camera is an opportunity for people to band together, and offer small items to the community, excellent place for small cottage industries, to offer solutions and develop the system.

OK, the DIN connectors may not be everyone's first choice, but it was a design decision made and produced. It does not render the camera unusable. Maybe there was a reason behind shipping evey camera with a DIN to BNC adaptor... to give people an option. I'm sure when the 12 Pin Hirose was dropped from production models people may have been upset. These guys are learning in the heat of the kitchen.

The motto all along has been "Revolution" Wouldn't the world be a boring place if everyone got what they wanted when they wanted and were satisfied?

 

[Jarred Land]

This camera is an opportunity for people to band together, and offer small items to the community, excellent place for small cottage industries, to offer solutions and develop the system.

OK, the DIN connectors may not be everyone's first choice, but it was a design decision made and produced. It does not render the camera unusable. Maybe there was a reason behind shipping evey camera with a DIN to BNC adaptor... to give people an option. I'm sure when the 12 Pin Hirose was dropped from production models people may have been upset. These guys are learning in the heat of the kitchen.

The motto all along has been "Revolution" Wouldn't the world be a boring place if everyone got what they wanted when they wanted and were satisfied?

Hirose was dropped because it just simply was a weak connector that didnt work well in our application and failed horribly in the field for us.. it was an expensive fix for us to make but we made it because it was the right thing to do.

The din connectors on the other hand, are fully functional, robust and the only issue is that its not an industry standard connector, and can be a pain in the ass to deal with in terms of cabling... but it does work and does not fail as much as it looks like it could... so its more of a subjective decision, and gladly one that people have the option to change with these boxes.

 

[Dylan Macleod CSC]

Why won't Red just admit they put the wrong connectors on the camera? I find it hard to get excited about a box that fixes a design flaw.

Hey Jarred

It was crewpix's comment that I was responding to...that I didn't properly quote!

I wouldnt call it a design flaw.. since at the time it was a requirement for mechanical constraints... and macleod I'd like to know who at Red is saying that mini-bnc's are better then full size BNC's....... pm me.

Its been our number one complaint since day one, which is why we are so excited about helping breed solutions. People should just be happy that for full size lovers there is an option, just because it didnt directly come from us doesnt mean the solution should be discarded.

I understand now from your response that it doesn't appear to be RED's first choice either, but an initial mechanical constraint.

I didn't hear from anyone at RED that the mini's are better than regular. I only made that assumption because that is the way the camera was designed with and it is what I will be consequently receiving in a couple of months.

Maybe there was an acknowledgement that I missed somewhere along the line that this was not an ideal choice, but a practical one.

Now I get it...I think?

Dylan Macleod, CSC
Toronto, Canada
www.dylanmacleod.com

 

[Jarred Land]

thanks Dylan for the explanation.. i think we are all on the same page

 

[Michael Morlan]

Actually, I like this bit of modular add-on since, when it fails after hundreds of cycles, accidental cable tugs, and the camera being sat on its butt, I can easily and inexpensively replace the little box instead of sending the camera in for repair.

Keep 'em comin'.

Michael

 

[Jarred Land]

agreed Michael.. and its nice it throws the cables backwards as well, which for some people is preferable.

 

[Arnaud Paris]

So back to the initial discussion... price and availability?
Thanks
Arno

 

[eltech]

As always it’s great to hear the feedback and diverse perspectives. First we would like to say thanks to Jarred and the rest of the team at RED for the continued support.

The breakout box pictured at the beginning of the thread is a first article of the final design. While that particular one wasn’t wired, another just like it was wired and installed for signal testing. We are currently knee deep in aluminum chips trying to get these finished and assembled.

As far as the functionality of the breakout box, the idea is to install it and leave it in place until you have a reason to access the original connectors. We did not conceive of it as a macro connector for the 4 signals. The stock connectors are high quality and high bandwidth commercial RF connectors. I cannot speak to the genesis of the decision to use these connectors but I know they are typically chosen when signal integrity and space are guiding requirements. Like most high quality RF connectors these were designed to survive 500 mating cycles just like the HD SDI BNC connectors in our breakout box. As Michael Morton mentioned, this box makes it possible to eat up the available mating cycles on an easily (and inexpensively) repaired component rather than on the camera itself. Had RED selected PCB mounted BNC connectors in the same place and orientation as the minis, we likely would have still built the breakout box if for no other reason than to take the stress off of the camera’s connectors and to re-route the cable toward the rear. The right side of the camera has a huge amount of IO going on. The current configuration makes the camera as slim as is physically possible while still offering the IO options.

We will be selling the breakout box for $580 US and should have adequate quantities by mid January.

Keep the feedback coming.

 

[C.H.Haskell]

we likely would have still built the breakout box if for no other reason than to take the stress off of the camera’s connectors and to re-route the cable toward the rear.

Sounds good to me...anything to reduce wear on the direct connections themselves. Its a modular system after all so I really like just the having options. You got my order.

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

will your goodies_____evf mount__breakoutbox___rods will be available through red?

 

[Anders Holck]

Also very interested to know that.

 

[Clayton Harper]

500 mating cycles

Hehehe. "Mating Cycles" :biggrin:

 

[david farland]

....this box makes it possible to eat up the available mating cycles on an easily (and inexpensively) repaired component rather than on the camera itself. .....Keep the feedback coming.

Steve,
Looks beautiful however I would've expected mating cycles in the 1000's rather than 100's by using better coated contacts on the connectors. The inference above on mating cycles makes it sound like the adapter is a semi disposable (or repairable) item. I'm sure the last thing you want is another noisy connector in the loop. I understand thicker & different coated contacts cost a little more but can usually be purchased with varying thicknesses gold/silver/etc.

Dave,

 

[Wes Printz]

Amphenol Specifications call out 500 Mating cycles on the DIN 1.0/2.3 connector.

The 1.0/2.3 series is a European design introduced in the 1990s. The compact design of the 1.0/2.3 permits dense connector packing; they are ideally suited to applications where space limitation is a factor.

Amphenol 1.0/2.3 coaxial connectors are 50 Ω and 75 Ω units operating from 0-10 GHz. This series complies with DIN 41626, DIN 47297, and NFC 93-571 international specifications.

1.0/2.3 Specifications:

Electrical
Impedance 50 / 75 Ω
Frequency Range 0-10 GHz
Voltage Rating 250 volts peak
Contact Resistance Center contact: 6 Ω ; Outer contact: 3 Ω
Insulation Resistance 10,000 megaohms


Mechanical
Mating Slide-on, push-pull, threaded
Braid/Jacket Cable Affixment Hex crimp
Center Conductor Cale Affixment Crimp or solder
Captivated Contacts All crimps


Material
Male Contact Brass
Female Contact Beryllium copper center and outer, gold plated
Insulator Teflon
Crimp Ferrule Copper


Environmental
Temperature Range -40 °C to + 155 °C
Connector Durability 500 matings

Note: These characteristics are typical but may not apply to all connectors.

 

[david farland]

Not sure where you're going on the specs here but when I needed to choose a connector for a particular design application I'd be very mindful of what and how much contact plating to use. Make sense as you keep on inserting the connector, you rub off the gold plating. Better manufacturers usually give you the choice of the gold plate thickness which of course is pricier but gives you a higher mating count.

 

[Wes Printz]

however I would've expected mating cycles in the 1000's rather than 100's by using better coated contacts on the connectors. Dave,

Referring to your comment on the mating cycles, you seemed a bit surprised it was so low. True, you can have units made with different materials, platings, thickness etc.. it all adds up. Yes, it may add 2-4 dollars more per connector, but multiply that that 16,000 units, (based on reservation information) Not that they are cutting corners, but wanting to deliver the product at the price quoted.

Keeping in mind, the camera was initially priced at $17,500, That's a lot of bang for your buck. I'm sure there's not too much profit margin at this point if any, with all the R&D, improvements, etc... I'm sure it will be a while before this is a profitable venture for RED. I can imagine the major cost would be the sensor. My thinking is they may throw away more sensors than they keep due to quality control standards.

 

[Jaron Berman]

I know I'm going to be jumped all over because this is one of my first posts here, and it's negative, but this is ridiculous...

Jarred - unless I'm mistaken, the camera was conceived from the ground up by you guys. Hence any mechanical constraints stemming from the body shape and size would be self-imposed. As another poster pointed out - the indent on the side of the camera could have been flattened, with rear-swept bnc's which would provide some mechanical shielding - which I would assume is the purpose of the dent. Even with the Element adapter sticking off the side, the camera has exactly the same clearance it did before - limited by the FHG lemos.

Saying, "Its been our number one complaint since day one,"...out of curiosity, when a design problem arises internally, who do you complain to? Call it what it is, and congratulate Element for fixing a mistake. RED has done so many things right, I think you guys have the leeway to admit that this was a pretty dumb decision of function following form.