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

[GrahamClark]

Breakthrough Filters recently announced the first drop-in filter system for PL RF for Komodo as well as PL DSMC2.

Check out “The Making of Mark Toia’s Drop-In Filter System for DSMC2” here:

After announcing a simplified version straight PL RF mount for Komodo (without drop-in), Hot Rod Cameras said “We'll outperform Breakthrough's mount. That's an easy bet”, with regards to out of box sharpness.

(https://www.instagram.com/p/COwO0jmHxsN)

Sounds like a fun idea to me, so shall we call this bet the “$10,000 PL RF Komodo Sharpness Bet”?

Breakthrough Filters and Hot Rod Camera’s both put $10,000 in escrow, winner takes all.

In the event of a tie, 100% of the $20,000 goes to a non-profit charity chosen via RedUser poll.

Oh and hello RedUser.net, glad to be here.

My name is Graham, I’m a landscape photographer (www.grahamclarkphoto.com) and industrial designer.

I run Breakthrough Filters product design and manufacturing.

I also run a 5-axis CNC facility where we make products for filmmakers and photographers (www.newideasco.com)

My path to designing and machining products for filmmakers came about when our drop-in filter system which I initially created for the R became practical for filmmakers shooting Komodo as a result of it also using the RF mount.

We’ve already begun shipping PL RF Komodo mounts to a number of filmmakers, learn more you can visit www.PL2RF.com (nothing to buy, just info).

Graham

 

[Tim Daust]

First off, Welcome to REDUSER Graham!

Second, guess this opens a can of worms doesn’t it?

Wonder if Illya is going to take you up on this?

 

[Björn Benckert]

I have not bought one of these. But from looking at the video... There is a reason for ND solutions to have hard stops / ND 3,6,9,12 etc. Equal to F stops, equal to doubling the frame rate etc.

As for a lot of situations you want to be able to filter down or up exactly a known number of stops and then also be able to dial back where you had it before. As it looks this video this system works more like just turning the dial which is possibly great if you don't need known stops increments but like to set the exposure just to taste. But being such it makes it so that one would need to buy both the VND and fixed ND´s... Or how is it work, is it possible to know how much filtering is applied when turning that little thumb wheel?

 

[Bob Gundu]

Graham! Good to see you here.

 

[Lars Wikstrom]

I put money down last year on your drop in filter system but after 4 months of waiting I canceled, got the PolarPro / Metabones PL mount. But this product seems interesting and might switch to this set up when it hits the mass market and reviews come in. please post updates.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Nice one and welcome to Reduser Graham!!
Looking forward to chat again

 

[GrahamClark]

I have not bought one of these. But from looking at the video... There is a reason for ND solutions to have hard stops / ND 3,6,9,12 etc. Equal to F stops, equal to doubling the frame rate etc.

As for a lot of situations you want to be able to filter down or up exactly a known number of stops and then also be able to dial back where you had it before. As it looks this video this system works more like just turning the dial which is possibly great if you don't need known stops increments but like to set the exposure just to taste. But being such it makes it so that one would need to buy both the VND and fixed ND´s... Or how is it work, is it possible to know how much filtering is applied when turning that little thumb wheel?

Just to clarify, the video you're referencing is for a drop-in DSMC2, whereas this post is regarding a straight PL RF for Komodo.

But to answer your original question, we made the drop-in VND for photographers, where the arbritary optical density of how it rotates is a non-issue, as in photography getting to a specific stop is not important, whereas in cinema hitting a specific OD is.

All drop-in filters we've made so far were created specifically for photographers.

However I can see for filmmakers visual reference marks for OD + 0.8 modulus for motor control (and probably more) are reasons to make a "cinema" drop-in filter.

Graham

 

[Illya Friedman]

Graham,

I appreciate your marketing chutzpah.

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.

Fine.

But if I am to go through with this you, we first need to have a discussion of exactly how any contest will be administered, exact criteria, who will be the judge..etc.

I don't know you, so to proceed let's establish an element of trust. You are the challenger brand in this space, you have everything to gain by going up against the original and still best PL mount adapter ever made, and nothing but a $10,000 charitable donation to lose.

You mention Instagram, in Phill's post comments a 3rd party decided to take you to task for your claim, to which you responded rather rudely and accused of being connected to KipperTie. I don't know that person, but I have to say they made exactly the right point.

Which is, the distance between sensor position and camera flange depth is 100% the largest variable in the equation, especially when you have multiple manufacturers of cameras building to that same standard.

The manufacturing tolerance of any single mount adapter is f-ing TRIVIAL compared to all the cameras without sensor or native mount distance adjustment.

So it seems like you don't know this, which means I have to question your claims big time.

Which based on what you've written, it seems you are claimig that your knock-off, non-adjustable mount will somehow be more precise than The Hot Rod PL - Mark II, correctly shimmed to any camera being tested.

That is a fools errand. It's like saying that you will be able to throw a ping pong ball from the top of Coit Tower into fishbowl, blindfolded, and the fishbowl is on Alcatraz.

This will be fun, I can't wait to see what you write next.

 

[GrahamClark]

Graham,

I appreciate your marketing chutzpah.

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.

Fine.

But if I am to go through with this you, we first need to have a discussion of exactly how any contest will be administered, exact criteria, who will be the judge..etc.

I don't know you, so to proceed let's establish an element of trust. You are the challenger brand in this space, you have everything to gain by going up against the original and still best PL mount adapter ever made, and nothing but a $10,000 charitable donation to lose.

You mention Instagram, in Phill's post comments a 3rd party decided to take you to task for your claim, to which you responded rather rudely and accused of being connected to KipperTie. I don't know that person, but I have to say they made exactly the right point.

Which is, the distance between sensor position and camera flange depth is 100% the largest variable in the equation, especially when you have multiple manufacturers of cameras building to that same standard.

The manufacturing tolerance of any single mount adapter is f-ing TRIVIAL compared to all the cameras without sensor or native mount distance adjustment.

So it seems like you don't know this, which means I have to question your claims big time.

Which based on what you've written, it seems you are claimig that your knock-off, non-adjustable mount will somehow be more precise than The Hot Rod PL - Mark II, correctly shimmed to any camera being tested.

That is a fools errand. It's like saying that you will be able to throw a ping pong ball from the top of Coit Tower into fishbowl, blindfolded, and the fishbowl is on Alcatraz.

This will be fun, I can't wait to see what you write next.

1. PL to RF mounts are shipped on Wednesday May 26th, 2021, to Denz Precision Manufacturing: https://www.denz-precision.com/en/company/
2. The mounts may not be created specifically for this event, but rather they must be "production" units already shipped to filmmakers, not units made specifically for this experiment.
3. Denz is a German CNC facility which manufacturers flange depth measurement instruments. They are a 3rd party who is an authority in flange depth measurement, and they are unaware of your false claims, so let's call them an objective jury on accuracy for flange depth?
4. I'm calling you out on your false claims – nothing more.

How else are filmmakers to determine signal-to-noise ratio? That's worth much more than $20,000.

 

[Dan Kanes]

In the spirit of letting cooler heads prevail:

https://youtu.be/yByhd7FAOug

 

[Timothy Jones]

Hilarious!

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

some audiences never move past the "dumb and dumber" haha
I mean the trailer to be clear. I command anyone having the guts and passion to make new product for our industry........

 

[Dan Kanes]

Aww c'mon Jacek - you make lens adapters and stuff too - you gotta take these guys to the mat with your precision run-outs, optical flatness by interferometer reading, and spectrographic prowess.

I love a good nerd drag-race.

https://youtu.be/LGUYsuYudVA

It does take a certain kind of Chutzpah to kind of stir some shit up on Phil Holland's instagram post about the breakthrough adapter.

Clearly Phil must like the breakthrough adapter enough to post about it, he didn't post about a Hot Rod adapter - so, like, I kinda see why Graham would be throwing down the gauntlet.

 

[Björn Benckert]

Am I getting this right if I say that you, Graham claim that your mount which, if I understand Iylas comment above correctly, is a mount that is not possible to shim is more precisely made than Iylas mount, which is a mount that can be shimmed?

Just to be clear, what ever the tolerance a mount is made to does not mean jack shit if it can not be shimmed.


Also Graham, as your mount is bolted down to a dowtail or something fixated only to the bottom of the camera for support you can not really compare it to Kippertie or vocas as Komodo cameras comes with different paint thickness and other oddities specific for each camera. So when fixating the mount as you do, you are likely to put stress on the RF mount and by doing so get an uneven flange distance. KipperTie for example does it differently with their chinstrap that use 4 mounting screws and if mounted correctly to the camera, as descibed on their web page, their chinstrap will give good suport for the lens mount without adding any stress to the mount in a way which a single mount point suport never can, no matter how precise the mount is made, again all individual cameras are made slightly different.

 

[Phil Holland]

Clearly Phil must like the breakthrough adapter enough to post about it, he didn't post about a Hot Rod adapter - so, like, I kinda see why Graham would be throwing down the gauntlet.

I'm in a good position to be a somewhat adult referee as whatever this bout leads to, specifically supporting a good cause and I know both individuals.

I do like Breakthrough's RF>PL Adapter and I've tested all the currently released ones, and unbelievably there are even more coming (which is equally good, bad, and weird). Also I'm literally a stone's throw away from Hot Rod. I'm curious to see where this all lands as long as it's competitive spirit and not a full face slap competition.

Rather confidently, I can say that Breakthrough's NDs are alarmingly good and they have easily made my approved list after testing them on various cameras and looking at spectral transmission results, that list is brand agnostic as well as catering to a range of relative performance levels. Graham is new to the cinema world, but not new to the rather demanding world of higher end photographers and imaging specialists when it comes to filtration and optical concerns. He's got a rather impressive outfit and capable team of optical engineers that have tended to the needs of imaging professionals.


We're in an interesting time of industry overlap between the worlds of stills and motion when it comes to accessories and what people use to do their work. Digital Stills and Motion Camera as a concept is pretty much where we are in the timeline and that was in the late 2000s. Though moderately controversial at the time, that has become a rather normal concept a decade later.

In that timeline there's been a lot of interesting choices and missteps with technology and tools along the way, even recently. But if you understand the leap to modern ND technologies from previous generations of dye based solutions through weirdly and wildly tinted IRNDs, that's a case example of taking a left turn to when needing to go right to get to the best solutions.

Back on topic, professional courtesy and discourse should likely be the the way here if both parties are playing ball. I'll emphasize it's a this is a filmmaking community here at REDuser. A good example is Jacek there above, whom I rather like, but we often disagree, and my toes curl when we do agree on something

 

[Bruce Allen]

I'm confused. This seems like two different use cases.

We're comparing a mount with no shims to a mount with shims?

Phil do you want to speak to this elephant in the room before going into a test?

Seems like the mount with no shims may be fractionally more accurate if put on a matching camera (I could see how if it was desiged specifically for Komodo this could be so if RED's tolerances are very tight and they don't change manufacturing processes), but:

- do filmmakers really need more accuracy than shims provide in real-world use?

- is it worth giving up the possibility of shimming in the future?

RF mount should be around for a loooong time. If RED makes a Komodo 2 or we want to put it on a Canon cinema camera (seems like nice ones are coming), I'm guessing we'd need to buy another adapter? That said, I could see that many Komodo folks would sell their PL mount with their camera... but also that means when every new camera comes out you have to wait for the mount guys to manufacture you a mount, whereas the guys with the shimmable mount can just start playing.

Have I got this correct, technically?

So I guess my next question would be what the real world advantages of giving up shims are.

I obviously trust shims... because they work, so you can see I'm a bit confused why make something expensive without shims. What am I missing?

Bruce Allen
www.bruceallen.tv

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

why do you need shims if the camera has sensor adjustment? does Komodo have sensor adjustment?

 

[M UHRY]

This is a fun read and I love the idea of a "SHARPNESS" sabers at dawn kind of duel. How are we defining "SHARPNESS" BTW - resolution + contrast ? Is there a number that comes out at the end, or is it 'Bro your shit is the most "SHARP".

Should we instead be talking about the AR coating, thickness and spectral transmittiance of the behind the lens ND filter ? It would seem to have MUCH more effect to more people than very slight FFD variances, shimmed or not. ( OK I prefer shims )

Matt Uhry
vimeo.com/mattuhry

 

[Vance Colvig]

No backfocus adjustment on Komodo.

 

[Phil Holland]

I'm confused. This seems like two different use cases.

We're comparing a mount with no shims to a mount with shims?

I don't want to dirty the waters of the "competition" here by contributing too much. But this is not a if it has shims or not sort of thing being discussed.

why do you need shims if the camera has sensor adjustment? does Komodo have sensor adjustment?

Komodo doesn't feature a sensor adjustment like many small cameras, which is why it's pretty dang important to have a mount that is shimmable.