Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • 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 :)

EPIC bottom only 1 hole

If you look at the photos carefully you will see that all of the pieces are there. Proper solid mount for the camera, rod support, etc.
 
hole issues.

hole issues.

I would like to go on record as saying - the more holes the better for the bottom of the camera. I have had many issues where I was fighting a particular mounting on a jib or hood mount or self made mount and it SUCKS. Especially how at least my RED bottom plate does not line up with the holes on the bottom of my RED. I will NEVER understand that one and why the Cheese Plate doesn't line up that well with either of those things. (vertically or laterally) C'mon RED you can do better than that.
 
Whatever the camera mounts on to, interim plate or whatever it need more than one fixing. If its on a wing mount, crane or high up it will pick its own moment to come adrift. Two very definitely and preferably more.
 
Whatever the camera mounts on to, interim plate or whatever it need more than one fixing. If its on a wing mount, crane or high up it will pick its own moment to come adrift. Two very definitely and preferably more.

Seconded!
 
Yeah, you definitely need two or more screws, not just for security but also to ensure a perfectly parallel mount for rods etc.

Hope that pic is just an early mockup issue and not a production level camera base.
 
Just looking at the photos on this thread you can clearly see that the base plate as capture tongues that will hold the camera in place (not allow it to twist on the tread) so there will be no greater risk of "the camera decided to come off" or drift with that design. It's actually kind of smart to completely capture the rotational capabilities of the camera on the base plate before thread mounting.
 
Just looking at the photos on this thread you can clearly see that the base plate as capture tongues that will hold the camera in place (not allow it to twist on the tread) so there will be no greater risk of "the camera decided to come off" or drift with that design. It's actually kind of smart to completely capture the rotational capabilities of the camera on the base plate before thread mounting.

True. But you may not always want to use that plate. For example, with Steadicam, you might want to mount directly to the body to save weight.
 
Oh, I suppose I should have added that I agree with the "two point mount / low form factor" desires. The problem with creating a new smart mount is that nothing else uses it. So while the camera and it's new base plate work great, you need either an adapter or two real, standardized mounting points in the camera.

Then again this brain is far lighter than most (if any) pro cameras we typically fly. The addition of a slim light weight 3rd party (or red) cheese plate to give standard threads at the standard spacing wont rock the boat too bad.
 
I would like to go on record as saying - the more holes the better for the bottom of the camera. .

your forgetting one thing... if you put more holes.. it takes alot of internal space. each hole needs a pretty healthy piece of metal surrounding it internally to maintain strength, so the camera needs to get bigger, etc. etc. etc. if you want alot of holes.. just bolt a cheese plate to the bottom.
 
your forgetting one thing... if you put more holes.. it takes alot of internal space. each hole needs a pretty healthy piece of metal surrounding it internally to maintain strength, so the camera needs to get bigger, etc. etc. etc. if you want alot of holes.. just bolt a cheese plate to the bottom.

I understand that and respect the issues, but at the end of the day if the camera has only one screw then whole camera is attached with one mounting point and thats not good. It it can come adrift on some one it will no mater how much care is taken. Apart from the practical issues, if its mounted overhead could be a jib or any other form of overhead mount the camera must have two points of fixing from a safety point of view, over here thats a legal thing.
 
your forgetting one thing... if you put more holes.. it takes alot of internal space. each hole needs a pretty healthy piece of metal surrounding it internally to maintain strength, so the camera needs to get bigger, etc. etc. etc. if you want alot of holes.. just bolt a cheese plate to the bottom.


There better be some indents or location pin or some way to assure the baseplate is aligned. What about making a camera tray (a cheeseplate with edges that line up with the body of the camera to keep it in place so accessories, etc line up properly without the worry of shifting, etc. Especially if the Epic is going to be used on a 3D beamsplitter rig where alignment is critical.
 
Im sure they will be very useful but I generally find the base plate works better underneath the camera :-)

I guess that Laco commented on Jarred`s post.
 
your forgetting one thing... if you put more holes.. it takes alot of internal space. each hole needs a pretty healthy piece of metal surrounding it internally to maintain strength, so the camera needs to get bigger, etc. etc. etc. if you want alot of holes.. just bolt a cheese plate to the bottom.

But you can't bolt a cheeseplate on the bottom, that's the problem. There's no way to securely attach a cheeseplate.

How are you seeing this cheeseplate attach? Velcro?
 
Laco is right. Remember the top handle holes?
While I think the F-35 and Genesis are "over the top" large, I would take a marginally bigger camera if it were more up to professional standards.
I said it with the Red One. I don't need an 8 pound camera with compromises. A 12 pound camera that is rock-solid is better. I don't need an $18,000 camera with all sorts of issues, I need a rock-solid $40,000 camera.
In the case of the Epic, I don't really want a chunky DSLR (despite everyone tripping over themselves to use them) If you guys need to make it 3/8" taller to accommodate another screw hole than so be it.
As an assistant, I have many times gone to check the torque of the bottom screws, on a variety of cameras, only to find one of them completely loose.
Unless you guys are going to invent some sort of new dovetail mounting system (like Panavision's dovetail mount or the ENG/broadcast touch and go) I'd lobby hard for two 3/8" holes on the bottom. Heck, I'd even argue that having that 1/4" hole next to the 3/8" is good enough if there is some sort of intermediate plate that lets us use a bridgeplate system from the known universe, such as ET or ARRI. Even a locating pin, like ARRI used to use in the 1970's and 1980's would suffice, although the redundancy of two threaded holes would be better.
Once again, I'm just hoping that you have invited some good AC's and DP's up there to give some advice based on years of experience, and not just designing a camera in a vacuum.
Cheers,
Harry
 
It's amazing such a small thing seems to have such a big impact.

I understand RED is trying to change the industry, but at the same time it should do it as quietly as possible. The RED baseplate looks like it would work great, and I'm sure it does, but if I already have an ET, Arri, or anything else that currently works for almost everything else, then I feel that having to purchase a new baseplate seems superfluous. That also entails spending extra dough, which for some people could deter them altogether.

At the end of the day, if it's an inch taller, it's still friggin tiny.
 
But you can't bolt a cheeseplate on the bottom, that's the problem. There's no way to securely attach a cheeseplate.

How are you seeing this cheeseplate attach? Velcro?

yes there is.... you just havn't seen it yet...
 
Back
Top