EPIC Titanium mount... why not stainless steel?

[Andrae Palmer]

I've been doing some research online to see what some of the differences would be between the Aluminum Canon Mount and the Titanium mount. What I've found is that on camera bodies like the 5D Mark II the material used is stainless steel for the mount. I'm presuming that the stainless steel mount is stronger than an aluminum mount. If this stainless steel mount is good enough for Canon on all their cameras... why did RED go with a titanium mount as the only option available for the EPIC cameras? Does any DSLR's currently have a Titanium mount?

 

[Justin O'Neill]

Just a couple guesses: one, cinema lenses tend to be a lot heavier than still lenses. Two, keeping back focus is much more important when you are measuring focus out. Titanium doesn't shrink or swell in heat or cold.

 

[Elsie N]

removed


edit: Oops, thought you were talking PL mount for the Epic, Andre.

 

[roryhinds]

my guess is if they are making PL Ti mounts then it would make them more cost effective to be making Canon Ti mounts too... more Ti you purchase the cheaper it becomes.

PL Ti Mount makes sense as Cinema lenses are a lot heavier than Stills lens and personally I think the Ti Canon mount is total overkill. Like you say Canon make camera's without a Ti Mount.

 

[Andrae Palmer]

Just a couple guesses: one, cinema lenses tend to be a lot heavier than still lenses. Two, keeping back focus is much more important when you are measuring focus out. Titanium doesn't shrink or swell in heat or cold.

I can understand the logic with the Titanium PL mount... but the Canon Titanium Mount is designed for still lenses. I just bought the Canon Titanium Mount used today and am just curious to see why the decision to go with Titanium instead of say Stainless Steel that Canon uses on their mounts.

 

[Alan Skinner]

Cool factor?

"and my lens mount is milled from a solid piece of Titanium. Would you like to go up to my room and see it? It is right next to my etchings........................."

 

[Andrae Palmer]

Cool factor?

"and my lens mount is milled from a solid piece of Titanium. Would you like to go up to my room and see it? It is right next to my etchings........................."

LOL... it does have a certain cool factor but it just cost me $2500 to get it used in the sales section. A stainless steel cheaper option would be great... I wouldn't buy the aluminum version knowing that Canon uses a stronger mount.

 

[Alan Skinner]

Yes, I choked hard when I sent the money for mine. Feels like I am sporting around a chunk of gold. But, the pain wears off and the darn thing will last longer than I will............

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Ti me up!

Ti me up!

The first couple of years that the RedOne's were in the wild there was chatter about some issues with back focus. Most of the time it was folks with a video background that weren't hip to shimming PL mounts and hadn't been bought up measuring to witness marks. Another issue that led to badly set FFD, even at competent rental houses, was the OLPF filter in front of the sensor giving them a false read on the focal plane. It was certainly not RED's fault that camera techs measured to the wrong surface, but the end result was a couple of high profile focus snafus that spiraled into the overblown FUD that follows everything RED.

(Digression alert: Considering how desperately the entrenched players in the industry wanted to smear RED, what is truly amazing is how few genuine problems there have been, even in the earliest quasi-beta days. I maintain that over 95% of all "problems" linked to RED's program were actually erroneous assumptions by users. You can take shots at RED for the atypical way they, to some extent, "crowd supported" via RedUser, but that would be ignoring the level of technical support that has always been available directly from RED. OK, rant over.)

My point is that RED was determined to make a bulletproof mount next time around. The Ti mount on my Epic and every one I have rented has worked a treat. It may be perceived by some as expensive but I LOVE it.

All that said, I look forward to an Al EOS mount for $500 that strikes me as the right balance of cost, strength and precision. Most lenses designed for stills use are much lighter in weight than their PL cousins. Since stills lenses typically don't have repeatable focus markings on the barrel, either auto focus or eye focus is typically employed which (as long as the FFD isn't WAY off) means that you just find sharps wherever they live anyway.

Now, what if the next generation of multi-purpose electronic lenses employs an EOS mount and some are much heavier than the typical stills market lens...? Perhaps the Ti Canon mount is worth an extra $1,500 after all...

Cheers - #19

 

[Scott Crawley]

Are the benefits of stainless over aluminum enough to justify offering another mount at all when aluminum is really sufficient for most users? They had already invested in the Ti milling equipment for the Pl mounts, so why not leverage that investment? Why invest in a third line of material? Why not go all the way with the premium version and capture the cool factor? Use the absolute best. It seems like a no-brainer.

It's attitude, status, style AND function. It is the Red way. It is branding as much as anything, I suppose.

 

[Andrae Palmer]

It's attitude, status, style AND function. It is the Red way. It is branding as much as anything, I suppose.

Does it really matter if the client doesn't know the difference? Out of curiosity... is there a way to discern the difference between an Aluminum Canon mount and a Titanium Canon mount?

 

[Scott Crawley]

Does it really matter if the client doesn't know the difference? Out of curiosity... is there a way to discern the difference between an Aluminum Canon mount and a Titanium Canon mount?

Which clients do you mean, us as Red's clients or the folks who hire us?

I haven't seen the two side by side. I'd be interested to know the answer to your second Q as well.

 

[Andrae Palmer]

Which clients do you mean, us as Red's clients or the folks who hire us?

The folks who hire us.

 

[Scott Crawley]

The folks who hire us.

If you use it in your own marketing they will know. I suppose that is of dubious value in most cases, but if your client needs that thermo-stability then it absolutely makes a difference.

I chose Ti mostly for my own peace of mind. Stability, strength and wear and tear were my concerns. How 'bout you? Did you opt for the savings instead?

 

[Andrae Palmer]

I chose Ti mostly for my own peace of mind. Stability, strength and wear and tear were my concerns. How 'bout you? Did you opt for the savings instead?

I opted for the quality... thank God I don't have a wife that checks my spending. I'm now trying to make sense of my decision. Presuming that the aluminum mount is weaker than the standard stainless steel mount on the Canon.. then I guess that's a good justification.

 

[Stacey Spears]

is there a way to discern the difference between an Aluminum Canon mount and a Titanium Canon mount?

Al Canon mount is all black.

 

[William Albertini]

316 stainless, the most common formula and the one that is most resistant to corrosion is actually quite soft. The harder varieties such as those used in knife blades are probably very difficult to machine, and heavy. Titanium while also difficult to machine is light.

 

[Scott Crawley]

I opted for the quality... thank God I don't have a wife that checks my spending. I'm now trying to make sense of my decision. Presuming that the aluminum mount is weaker than the standard stainless steel mount on the Canon.. then I guess that's a good justification.

(Edit: Oops I missed your earlier comment anout the purchase, Sorry)

I ordered the mount as part of the package before the end of the year price bump, so if I were to cancel the Ti kit now and order the aluminum the savings is only $500. I don't feel badly paying and extra $500 for titanium.

I'm a master of justification!

316 stainless, the most common formula and the one that is most resistant to corrosion is actually quite soft. The harder varieties such as those used in knife blades are probably very difficult to machine, and heavy. Titanium while also difficult to machine is light.

Ah yes we overlooked weight. I wonder how front heavy a stainless mount would be.

 

[Andrae Palmer]

Al Canon mount is all black.

Thanks Stacey!

316 stainless, the most common formula and the one that is most resistant to corrosion is actually quite soft. The harder varieties such as those used in knife blades are probably very difficult to machine, and heavy. Titanium while also difficult to machine is light.

I wonder what type of stainless steel is on Canon DSLR mounts.

Ah yes we overlooked weight. I wonder how front heavy a stainless mount would be.

It doesn't seem like it would be a substantial difference due to the small amount of metal being used.

 

[Björn Benckert]

For lenses without focus marks the flange distance is not that important. How ever if you put weight on your lens (read long lens no support or matte box filters etc.) Then the more precision you have in your lens mount the better since that can give you a slight swing shift effect..

Canon, is far from setting the standards in this field as they also makes lenses that has plastic mounts... so that kind of says that they go lower than aluminum. Also for 5D, 7D and 1D canon screws their mounts into plastic. The camera body is aluminum on those cameras but the sensor is mounted in plastic and there is plastic in between the mount and sensor... I do not know the build for C300 but my guess is that it's not much better then the 1D.

So basically RED gives the option of high standard Ti mounts and also a slightly lover standard for canon mounts in Al. I think , I might be wrong, that Al does expand/ contracts less depending on heat than stainless steel. That might be the reason for going for al mount instead of stainless... not sure though.