I call Hot Rod Cameras Bluff with a $10,000 Bet (for Sharpest PL RF for Komodo)

[GrahamClark]

It creates more problems for the end user who now has to re-calibrate their lens everytime they change to a new PL Mount body.

but you do agree you would only have to re-calibrate lenses if the "new PL mount body" was not to spec, right?

I hope the end result to be you collimate your lens to spec, and you're all set

the only moving target in my opinion should be the lens – the mounts should take care of the other 2 variables

but this thread has taught me one important thing: "make the user adjustable backfocus mount now"

it seems only ironic that the user adjustable backfocus was solved by Zerk in 1929, who also created filmmaker tripods and the first fluid heads.

imagine performing a calibration in the sand dunes with shims on a lens or a mount.

user adjustable backfocus would take seconds without any tools.

leave it up to the 1920's for a simple solution.

 

[GrahamClark]

The language being used is misleading. Showing images purporting to be side by sides is only showing you a side by side of two unadjusted unshimmed, unverified mount adaptors as they came from out of a box.

This is why I think this thread has caused so much angst. Basically there’s a lot is smoke and mirrors but this should actually be really simple.

I’m all for innovation and hooray for new players. As a DOP I love options. But the messaging here stinks.

which PL RF mount do you use for Komodo?

 

[Rency EmmanuEl]

While I am a bit out of my depth in this thread, I can answer this one: I do think that an adapter shipped at least close to calibrated for my camera is a really good thing for a person like me. I would not be using it on multiple cameras and I'm unlikely to travel somewhere and get it calibrated perfectly. If it works, I'm happy.

YUP

 

[GrahamClark]

Then you are completely oblivious as to what I’m saying I can see. The vocas mount I’m taking about is the one that uses the ridged 4 point connection for Komodo utilizing side mounts.

You keep spewing the same excuses with very little explanation on your hypothesis. Bottom line is there are at least a few very nerdy professionals on here, all with long backgrounds in exactly this field who have already argued and brought up very valid points opposing your design and philosophy of use of your product, yet your only response to anybody has still been “but you’ll be in spec closer than the others”.

And in response to me talking about your vaporware, I’m speaking on behalf of the rest of the people who gave you money for a product and waited eight months with still no response from you

100% agree with you on supports:

I've found supports made custom to the cages and one flush to Komodo for $5 to make sense

I have found this type of support to keep Cooke S4's from straying off target, no need to kill an ant with a sledgehammer

for very long / heavy lenses you're using rails right? lens support on rails seems like a good way to go for longer setups, but I could be wrong

I never claimed we were the sharpest solution or best solution, I only called the bluff of Mr Hot Rod, just a bit lighthearted fun, nothing more

And in response to me talking about your vaporware, I’m speaking on behalf of the rest of the people who gave you money for a product and waited eight months with still no response from you

there's never any hostage situation with us, this isn't The Negotiator, anyone can ask for a refund at any point and done (24/7 phones), just like that.

we make best selling products in a few product categories (ND, CPL, GND, UV, step-up rings, tripods & ballheads for stills), we ship over 100,000 units a year, where's the vaporware there?

 

[GrahamClark]

I definitely see value in a properly calibrated adapter.
IMO here is the order of adjustments if there is an error

3. Adapter Why? This is the last component to adjust because it should be set to a fixed height mechanically and left there.

Logically in my opinion this order makes most sense and will comply with the lens/camera interchangeability premise- a staple of the rental facilities excellence.

shouldn't this be the first because then it removes the camera as a variable and leaves only 1: PL lens?

since you make lens accessories, do you see the benefit in a user adjustable lens mount?

 

[GrahamClark]

I don't know if the RF mount on the Komodo has removable chims if it's to far out or what chims to use to bring it further out. But of course yes it should be checked and corrected.

RF lenses direct mounted to Komodo, RF lenses don't have hard stop infinity - non issue, but I'm sure you're referring to cinema glass.

in that case you're referring to the mount being checked and corrected, now you're referring to the crux of the thread.

 

[GrahamClark]

How do you know if they have 1, 2, 3 thousands and which direction? It is completely random. Making a single shim and marking it "R" makes no sense...

I'm not going to say how or why, but I can say it does make sense, in terms of user experience, in my opinion

 

[John Brawley]

but you do agree you would only have to re-calibrate lenses if the "new PL mount body" was not to spec, right?

I agree. It's something that's already constantly checked by any half decent 1st AC all the time in the field. And it's not uncommon for the body to need to be adjusted and addressed over the course of a shoot.

but this thread has taught me one important thing: "make the user adjustable backfocus mount now"

You've diverted to this issue many times.

There's a massive fleet of very beloved PL mount lenses out there already existing that do not have this function, so making a product that assumes they're all adjustable and promoting that seems naive.

Zeiss made the Master Primes, but they also made a whole equivilent set of B4 mount primes and zooms called Digiprimes and Digizooms. They had a novel back focus adjustment complete with a scale on the back.

It was brilliantly implemented. No one ever copied this or used it. Cinema work for the large screen requires a much higher level of precision than the average landscape photographer needs. Unless you have a field collimator then making it user adjustable will never be precise enough for super critical work.

As an aside, Zeiss, starting from the original Superspeeds, have a unique single or two letter code that is machined into the focus scale near infinity of their lenses going back to the superspeeds. Bonus point if you know what they are for and when you use them.

it seems only ironic that the user adjustable backfocus was solved by Zerk in 1929, who also created filmmaker tripods and the first fluid heads.

imagine performing a calibration in the sand dunes with shims on a lens or a mount.

user adjustable backfocus would take seconds without any tools.

leave it up to the 1920's for a simple solution.

You do need tools. You make that comment without understanding why. Clearly it's been possible.

It hasn't been implemented because it can't be done on a sand dune to an exacting amount of precision to be able to work for large screen projection and cross camera compatibility unless you use a field collimator. By the way, Zeiss even made one specially for the digiprimes called the Sharpmax that was made to be "athermal"

https://www.calkovsky.com/sold-zeis...device-zeiss-digi-prime-lens-hd-movie-camera/

Now if you work out a way to make it user adjustable in the mount adaptor itself with a degree of precision you might have a unique and compelling product. You'd still need a collimator to be 100% to spec and you seem to care about that.

JB

 

[Nick Morrison]

I agree. It's something that's already constantly checked by any half decent 1st AC all the time in the field. And it's not uncommon for the body to need to be adjusted and addressed over the course of a shoot.




You've diverted to this issue many times.

There's a massive fleet of very beloved PL mount lenses out there already existing that do not have this function, so making a product that assumes they're all adjustable and promoting that seems naive.

Zeiss made the Master Primes, but they also made a whole equivilent set of B4 mount primes and zooms called Digiprimes and Digizooms. They had a novel back focus adjustment complete with a scale on the back.

It was brilliantly implemented. No one ever copied this or used it. Cinema work for the large screen requires a much higher level of precision than the average landscape photographer needs. Unless you have a field collimator then making it user adjustable will never be precise enough for super critical work.

As an aside, Zeiss, starting from the original Superspeeds, have a unique single or two letter code that is machined into the focus scale near infinity of their lenses going back to the superspeeds. Bonus point if you know what they are for and when you use them.




You do need tools. You make that comment without understanding why. Clearly it's been possible.

It hasn't been implemented because it can't be done on a sand dune to an exacting amount of precision to be able to work for large screen projection and cross camera compatibility unless you use a field collimator. By the way, Zeiss even made one specially for the digiprimes called the Sharpmax that was made to be "athermal"

https://www.calkovsky.com/sold-zeis...device-zeiss-digi-prime-lens-hd-movie-camera/

Now if you work out a way to make it user adjustable in the mount adaptor itself with a degree of precision you might have a unique and compelling product. You'd still need a collimator to be 100% to spec and you seem to care about that.

JB

I just want to call out how awesome and great John Brawley ACS you are being here. I'm really impressed, and I admire your generosity here.

I've been watching this thread with bemusement for a week, struck as much by the wasted opportunity pregnant in this "competition".

There are so many smart people on this thread - more interesting minds are chiming in on this topic than we've seen in a long time on Reduser.

Lets be honest, we all know the golden age of Reduser is over, simply because so many of the original high-end users have moved on, and are no longer singularly focused on RED. This is normal.

But for one nano-second, this competition about the "ideal mount" "to spec" for Komodo, has brought out so many of the big guns, all in one place.

And this is why I want to applaud you, John Brawley ACS. Because underneath the bluster, Graham is *clearly* super talented and capable. He *clearly* has the technical skill, machinery, and ambition to make new, interesting things. Filmmaking should be *EMBRACING* someone like him, not rejecting them. But to be embraced, that requires some humility, some acceptance of what you know/don't know.

And here - you gave it to him.You were fair, and let Graham know what's been done, what's hasn't, and what CAN be done (and needs to), in a way that's really encouraging and clear.

And lets be honest - we want guys like Graham to succeed. It's not just good for them, its good for all of us. If he has the expertise/ambition/drive to innovate in our field, then that's fantastic, and should be encouraged.

So John Brawley ASC - kudos to you sir for seeing the potential is this thread/convo, and pushing it in the right direction.

Filmmaking and its community has always been a team sport - we're at our best when everyone comes together (as opposed to knocking heads haha).

 

[William Long]

I completely agree with Nick. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

There's a massive fleet of very beloved PL mount lenses out there already existing that do not have this function, so making a product that assumes they're all adjustable and promoting that seems naive.

Zeiss made the Master Primes, but they also made a whole equivalent set of B4 mount primes and zooms called Digiprimes and Digizooms. They had a novel back focus adjustment complete with a scale on the back.

It was brilliantly implemented. No one ever copied this or used it. Cinema work for the large screen requires a much higher level of precision than the average landscape photographer needs. Unless you have a field collimator then making it user adjustable will never be precise enough for super critical work.


JB

While this is worth noting it needs proper context. It obviously has not worked out and neither has the back focus adjustment on the Fuji zooms. The Digi primes were made at the very early stages of digital cameras, 3 chip with massive heat issues due to the massive power draw. They based the back focus adjustment on the broadcast zoom lenses that always had it due to above mentioned heat issue. Not only zoom lenses are a lot quicker and easier to check and adjust the back focus but the broadcast cameras had lower resolutions which coupled with extreme depth of field of the smaller formats due to the magnification were a lot more forgiving. The other issue, just as crucial factor in the ultimate failure of that system is the disconnect between the broadcast and filming procedures. Focus check is a routine call in the broadcast world, it is performed quickly, efficiently and precisely. In the filming world it was and is a rarity, a weird, ill defined, unfamiliar procedure and, therefore, mostly ignored. If you want to change that please be my guest. IMO however the industry ha spoken already early on and the message is clear- the back focus and flange settings are the responsibility of the equipment provider- not the film crew.

 

[John Brawley]

Focus check is a routine call in the broadcast world, it is performed quickly, efficiently and precisely. In the filming world it was and is a rarity, a weird, ill defined, unfamiliar procedure and, therefore, mostly ignored. If you want to change that please be my guest. IMO however the industry ha spoken already early on and the message is clear- the back focus and flange settings are the responsibility of the equipment provider- not the film crew.

And in the broadcast world they tend to be in more controlled environments where it’s possible to be consistent.

I just want to call out how awesome and great John Brawley ACS you are being here. I'm really impressed, and I admire your generosity here.

Cheers Nick.

JB

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

And in the broadcast world they tend to be in more controlled environments where it’s possible to be consistent.

JB

Not sure if chasing tornados is exactly a controlled environment haha

 

[emil_h]

Graham,


Publicly calling out the inventor of the PL mount adapter, on my friend Phil Hollands post on Instagram no less, and then challenging me to a $10,000 bet.

Inventor of the PL mount adapter? Like in general or did Illya mean he developed a PL mount adapter for a specific sensor size because PL mount adapters have been around since at least the early 90's.

 

[Dan Kanes]

LOL.

To be honest , Illya did actually start this shitstorm on Phil’s Instagram. Not Graham. Graham simply reacted.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

LOL.

To be honest , Illya did actually start this shitstorm on Phil’s Instagram. Not Graham. Graham simply reacted.

Shitstorm?
Back in the day this would be a casual conversation. Oh well...got to get with the times...

 

[Dan Kanes]

Fair enough. This is a pretty casual conversation. Certainly it made me laugh a few times.

 

[emil_h]

So who's the victor?

 

[William Long]

The interesting and constructive side of this discussion.

 

[Peter Choi]

What will be the rear clearance space for PL protrusion on the breakthrough drop-in filter system? Most are okay, but revolva having some issues with some older and wider lenses.