Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • 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 :)

Is the redrock M2 adapter any good?

One thing I always wonder about is do the adapters which flip the image such as P&S and Letus have more light loss because of the mirroring? Whenever a mirror is used you typically lose some light. Has anyone ever done any thorough testing of light loss between all these adapters and checked for comparisons?

I understand where Afton is coming from in terms of time taken, though I dare say adding 20 minutes at the beginning of the day for the camera assistant to prep it ready for shooting and using the PL mount with cine lenses (RR) would negate the extra time to a degree. I'm a little suprised on a budget of $500k they used a 35mm adapter, was 35mm film not an option?

I would use whichever had the best results. If one loses more light than the other then it is worse - simple as.

My personal feeling is the P&S is overpriced just as most pro gear is. Something I hope Red is beginning to alter. With the release of RedOne I cannot comprehend why anyone will want to purchase the P&S at the price it is currently at. The Redrock pricing fits with the mentality of getting results for less money and that's surely one of the main purposes of using a 35mm adapter over film. If I was to go out and purchase one tomorrow it'd be the Redrock, purely and simply because I'd save the $7000+ I had left over towards buying a RedOne and would carry the 35mm adapter and HD cam around as backup.
 
PaulClements said:
I understand where Afton is coming from in terms of time taken, though I dare say adding 20 minutes at the beginning of the day for the camera assistant to prep it ready for shooting and using the PL mount with cine lenses (RR) would negate the extra time to a degree. I'm a little suprised on a budget of $500k they used a 35mm adapter, was 35mm film not an option?

I would use whichever had the best results. If one loses more light than the other then it is worse - simple as.

My personal feeling is the P&S is overpriced just as most pro gear is. Something I hope Red is beginning to alter. With the release of RedOne I cannot comprehend why anyone will want to purchase the P&S at the price it is currently at. The Redrock pricing fits with the mentality of getting results for less money and that's surely one of the main purposes of using a 35mm adapter over film. If I was to go out and purchase one tomorrow it'd be the Redrock, purely and simply because I'd save the $7000+ I had left over towards buying a RedOne and would carry the 35mm adapter and HD cam around as backup.
Click to expand...

Hey Paul,

Regarding the music video, I was surprised as well to see them using the camera setup they did. However, the video featured a couple recognizable faces which I imagine is where the money went.

Yes, PL mounts would've saved time, and would've been much preferred. However, the primary problem that was incessant throughout the day was the rigidity of the system - or lack thereof. The two rods were just not quite stiff enough to keep the RR exactly in its place and it had to be re-aligned after almost every shot. This is something I've experienced on more than one shoot, by the way.

The P&S is a single piece system, mounting the camera in a rock-solid manner. You mount the camera to IT, rather than mounting the adapter to rods, which mount to the camera.

When the P&S was first released, it was the only thing that did what it did, and I would agree that it took a few liberties with its pricing model - although I couldn't say for sure. The supply/demand equation must be followed.

Things have changed now. I'm truly a big fan of the RedRock, as I think it's starting from a great place with the consumer in mind. I would love to see the P&S adopt a pricing model closer to the RR, and I would love to see the RR adopt some of the design cues from the P&S. Hopefully, the two would find a happy medium.

Best,
Afton
 
Cheers for commenting Afton.

I've never had any hands on experience with the P&S adapter. The images on the website aren't exactly clear. They still require a rod system by the looks of it though, I'm curious as to how they attach to the different cameras, do they attach by screwing onto the lens cover?

From your experience did either one out perform the other in terms of light loss?

Cheers
Paul
 
AftonGrant said:
I think I summarized several of the key differences already in post #3 of this thread. Of course there are many more, some very technical that I don't feel the need to get into.

Yes, the PL option is great. It seems, however, that the SLR mount is the most popular by far. I have yet to work on a project using the M2 with a PL mount. I imagine the $450 cost of the option, as well as the price of the lenses (purchase or rental) is what keeps most consumers with the SLR option.

I still believe comparing the RedRock and the P&S as if they are both marketed to the same demographic is not practical. It's like trying to put a Honda and a Bentley in the same class. They'll both get you to your destination just fine, but they're very different vehicles. I just wanted to make some of those differences clear so a potential consumer can be better informed.
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to figure out though what warrants the $10000 price tag. I've always found the P&S image to be a little grainy with a look like it has a diffusion filter on it. Yes it's professionally manufactured and designed to lock securely on a camera, which IS far superior to what the M2 has to offer, but how much should that design up the price, really? $1000? $2000? I might pay $2500 for the P&S technic, but $10000 is far beyond the scope of reasonable.
And also like I mentioned, I feel the M2's image is sharper and cleaner anyways.
 
AftonGrant said:
I'm truly a big fan of the RedRock, as I think it's starting from a great place with the consumer in mind. I would love to see the P&S adopt a pricing model closer to the RR, and I would love to see the RR adopt some of the design cues from the P&S. Hopefully, the two would find a happy medium.
Click to expand...

I think that happy medium would have been the G35, had it ever been launched.
 
I've used the RedRock and both of the P+S Technic's (Mini and Pro) and it's very much horses for courses.

The P+S is far more solid and well engineered and they manufacture and sell units up front for a price. I have had some great results with it.

The Redrock is aimed at a lower budget market and you have to order before they build. It is more labour intensive to use. I adapted a hard mount system using filter holder, a rotating polar without the glass and a reversing ring and have had trouble with edge sharpness. You need to flip the mage somehow also, also a pain for handheld. The battery is a pain to change as well! That having been said I have also had some great results with it also.

The difference to me is that the P+S works out of the box. You can rent it out without a worry as it's pretty much bombproof, usual care taken of course!

The RR is an owner operator thing for me as it's fiddly and needs more time to set it up.

For a comparitive test refer to 'Showreel' back no's. The test was done on the set of '24'.

Mike Costelloe
 
Justin Anderson said:
I think that happy medium would have been the G35, had it ever been launched.
Click to expand...

The G35 is a mystery to me, they had what looked like a great product that worked well with plenty of people waiting to purchase one and then just dissappeared. Bizarre, I wonder if their designs infringed on someones patent elsewhere. Did anything more come from it?
 
From what I've read, it seemed like the PS Technik had more light loss than either the M2 or the Brevis (like more than a stop difference). Would anyone who has used both care to comment? I also noticed that the M2 has a hard mount kit available that is supposed to make it less hassle to set-up.

From the footage I've seen so far, I like the bokeh of the M2 the best, so that along with its managable light loss tends to have me leaning it that direction.
 
zakaree said:
i have inside information regarding this..

hold your breath from 1-2 months and youll see what i mean
Click to expand...

well I'm already blue in the face from the last year and a half so whats another 1-2 months. ;)
 
PaulClements said:
Bizarre, I wonder if their designs infringed on someones patent elsewhere. Did anything more come from it?
Click to expand...

Not that I knew of when I talked to Jonathan Houser but maybe more things happened since then. (last time I spoke anything with him was about 7 months ago)
 
Matt Garrett said:
I used a m2 with the hardmount kit last week on a music video and no adjustments were needed the rest of the day.
Screw it on, lock it on the rails and you're good to go.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
We rent a kit out but it is set up for hard mount and dedicated for the HVX200.The kit also includes its own set Nikon lenses.

We did run with the PL mount but found that changing mounts from Nikon to PL a major pain and time consuming and not owning our own PL glass was a problem in guaranteeing performance.

I would like to offer up our clients a more professional option but the scarcity and costs of Super Speeds and the cost of the Movie Tube and P+S Technik
push the investment out to US$40k.

This is a spot shot on the HVX and M2 with Nikons

Scroll down to Little Brother TV Ad
 
All I can say is I ordered the M2 for my HVX-200 about 8 months ago, hard-mounted it and end of story. 8 months later and the M2 has officially merged with my camera, I have only removed it for cleaning or in an emergency needed those extra stops I was loosing in a low light situation. My clients are always extra pleased with the results althought it may not be a perfect sharp image edge to edge...I think thats what I like about, more organic looking.
 
I very rarely shoot my hvx without the hard mount m2, a great solution till red ships. The PS unit is is NO better at 10 times the price.
Aloha
-A
 
I can also testify to M2's no hassles use.

I admit the inverted image is a bit of a bother for me so I don't use it for run and gun style shooting.

When it comes to controlled environments and for short form work like TV commercials, the M2 is worth every cent and more.
 
M2

M2

I decided to buy a RR M2 system when I first saw it at 2006 NAB side by side with a P&S. Same cameras, scene, and lighting. The M2 just looked better and didn't have as much light loss. I have mine hard-mounted to a Sony V1U and use both PL and Nikon mounts. Edge-to-edge sharpness is fine and rigidity doesn't seem to be a problem even with a 500mm lens as long as I use their lens support accessory. It takes awhile for initial setup and alignment, but once this is established it is a quick and easy setup for the same camera. Simply slide it onto the rods, screw onto the camers's filter threads using the hard-mount adapter and lock down. Setting back-focus is easy. Flipping the image in Final Cut Pro is easy. Turning monitors upside down on the set is no big deal, but I wish I had a tiny battery operated black box on-board that would electronically flip the image for my Steadicam monitor. Does anyone know of such a product?
 
Well, I can vouch the M2 can produce beautiful pictures, inclredibly nice. BUT I have to tell you it's incredibly hard to use! First of all, the image flipped upside down is not a minor issue! Handholding the kit almost needs an external monitor, and is much clumsier than handholding any other sistem.

My DVX cannot produce sharp enough images with it, except maybe for web. I was never able to get sharp wide-angle images, only 50mm and up, and that's really bad...

Than, I have to hire an HVX, wich cuts on the resolution (for standard def M2 shooting), But it's incredibly darker. Most of the time I see myself shooting a wide shot with 2 1200 HMIs wide open and squeezing everything I can from them. Still, wide-angle shots can look pretty soft, if you don't know what you're doing.

(People say it's my backfocus, but I'm repeatedly trying to adjust it, and never seem to get a substantial improvement)

I go through all the hasle and am able to get beautiful images from it, granted I have the budget to get all the lighting and monitoring I need, but I definately wouldn't use it for ALL my projects, and that sucks, because the images from the cameras without it are incredibly dull, now that I've seen what it can do...
 
Redrock M2 Versus Mini35

Redrock M2 Versus Mini35

orre said:
Hi, has anyone worked with the M2 rr 35mm lensadapter?
How good is it compared to p+s minipro35?
Can I put in on my dvx 100 without the rod support system?
Click to expand...

I'm not too sure about the difference between the M2 and the Mini35 "Pro", though I do own two RedrockMicro M2's and two P+S Technik Mini35's, one of which is the Mini35 "Oszi" 400 series, and the other the new Mini35c AKA "Mini35 Compact" which we are still awaiting delivery on.
My experience with both these items may be different than others as we are utilizing and renting these adapters with our 3 JVC GY-HD 251E cameras.

I have to agree with Afton Grant when he says the following

AftonGrant said:
For the price, the M2 system is a great little tool to achieve a shallow depth of field look in the smaller DV cameras. However, it is definitely not as sophisticated as the P&S kits.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no doubt about this. One simply has to look at the workmanship between the two units. The P+S Technik is by far the superior unit in design, after all, you get what you pay for.
As far as function is concerned I have to agree that the M2 is a little more light sensitive than the Mini35 "ozsi" 400, yet not that much, and the new Mini35c is supposed to have much better light sensitivity than the "ozsi" and I would venture to say that it would have better sensitivity than the M2, but since we haven't received our unit yet for actual side be side comparisons, it's all speculation at this point.

Now don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoy the RedRock M2, It's simple yet highly effective and it does what it's marketed to do, it allows you to achieve adequate depth of field by utilizing a 35-mm lens, but I'm not so inclined to agree with Afton Grant when he says

"The RR uses 35mm STILL camera lenses, not 35mm cinema lenses like the P&S. There's a big difference. As an operator, not a DP, the biggest difference for me is that the still lenses have no gears, so you can't mount a follow focus without an additional adapter"

. . . as it's true that the P+S Technik Mini35 can use both still and Cinema lenses without a shadow of a doubt, according to Redrock, with the proper mounts the M2 can also use cinema lenses such as Cooke and Arri ultra primes, as well as whatever else might be available to you, so I'm not sure where Afton's assessment that the M2 can only use "Still" lenses is coming from. Maybe he hasn't tried it yet and he's just assumed that was the case.

My only qualm with the M2 is that it extends your whole camera set-up significantly in length as it acts as a medium between the standard lens that came with your camera and the 35mm lenses that you attach to the M2. This also adds weight to your setup in addition to length, especially if your going to throwing on a Mattebox and Follow focus.

I remember an associate looking at one of our M2 setups and he thought it looked more like an anti-aircraft gun that it did a camera. We had one of our JVC GY-HD 251E's fitted with a Fujinon TH17 x 5BRM-29 lens on the camera and then a Sigma EX 120-300mm zoom attached to the M2. You can imagine the length when the 2 were joined together.
In addition to the fact that the M2 adds length to the camera, we also have to utilize a Redrock achromatic lens so that the camera lens can properly view the cinescreen which spins around in the M2.

Call me shallow and superficial for caring about a way thing looks, but I think the P+S Technik Mini35 is a much more professional looking setup when compared to the M2. In addition to the way it looks it also is easier to set up and break down.
The Mini35 attaches directly to the camera body ( in the case of the JVC GY HD 251E ) and not to the lens of the camera, so it's more of an integral unit and doesn't add a considerable amount of extra length to the set up.

One thing that should be mentioned is that the P+S Technik now offers a set of 35mm Primes specifically with the Mini35 in mind.
Check here for more info.

Like other have said before me, it all comes down to your budget.
If you can afford the M2 by all means go for it and congratulations! I don't see why anyone would not be happy and satisfied with what their M2 does for them. . . but if you can afford the Mini35 or the new Mini35c, I'd give my humble suggestion to opt for the Mini35.

The P+S Technik is by far the superior unit, and the people at ZGC.com are a lot more friendly and treat their customers better than the people at Redrock, but that's only my personal opinion and experience and I'm in no way saying anything bad about Redrock.

Good luck on the prospective purchase.
I hope you get what's right for your needs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top