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 :)

Monstro initial thoughts

Motion mount is not a good solution due to light loss. A better solution is the kippertie revolva which is a lens mount that has internal ND and is just hitting the market. It's red approved and won't void your warranties
 
Motion mount is brilliant and seems to cover much more of the monstro than I expected. Could not se any problems with a Celere 25mm at 8K but I need to do more testing.
It takes around 60 secs to change mount, if you need to use the lowlight power of the sensor.
 
Brian Merlen said:
Motion mount is not a good solution due to light loss. A better solution is the kippertie revolva which is a lens mount that has internal ND and is just hitting the market. It's red approved and won't void your warranties
Click to expand...

Have you tested it? Or just recomend it on hear say?

As in theory it sounds great. But my worry is the 4 extra glas surfaces between the lens and the sensor. And the fact that it has a open slot facing upward for the filter tray. Gravity makes dust dust trickle downwards. The seal between the disc and the mount must be quite something and the layers of glass will for sure alter the look of any given lens in terms of flaring etc. Possibly not as much as the motion mount mount but considering the motion mount only has two surfaces of glass I can only speculate what the Kipper tie mount will introduce, I have not tried it so have no personal experience of it. So Im curious to hear, see tests etc.


Jens Jakob Thorsen said:
Motion mount is brilliant and seems to cover much more of the monstro than I expected. Could not se any problems with a Celere 25mm at 8K but I need to do more testing.
It takes around 60 secs to change mount, if you need to use the lowlight power of the sensor.
Click to expand...

The motion mount is great but not to be used as a ND. If it was then Im sure they would named it ND mount. When used as an ND the motion mount introduce some artfacts especially when shooting wide open. So it kind of kills it as an ND solution if you ask me.
 
Björn Benckert said:
Have you tested it? Or just recomend it on hear say?

As in theory it sounds great. But my worry is the 4 extra glas surfaces between the lens and the sensor. And the fact that it has a open slot facing upward for the filter tray. Gravity makes dust dust trickle downwards. The seal between the disc and the mount must be quite something and the layers of glass will for sure alter the look of any given lens in terms of flaring etc. Possibly not as much as the motion mount mount but considering the motion mount only has two surfaces of glass I can only speculate what the Kipper tie mount will introduce, I have not tried it so have no personal experience of it. So Im curious to hear, see tests etc.




The motion mount is great but not to be used as a ND. If it was then Im sure they would named it ND mount. When used as an ND the motion mount introduce some artfacts especially when shooting wide open. So it kind of kills it as an ND solution if you ask me.
Click to expand...

Cant really say I have seen a lot of artifacts in the 3+ years I have used the motion mount in many, many different situations with many different lenses, primarily as ND and mostly below f4. I am sure that if it was not meant to be used as an ND, there would not be an ND-function let alone an ND ONLY-function. Off cause if you dial it up to beyond where the recommendation stops, then you start to see some funny stuff, mostly colour wise. What articfacts are you talking about Björn?
 
Jens Jakob Thorsen said:
Cant really say I have seen a lot of artifacts in the 3+ years I have used the motion mount in many, many different situations with many different lenses, primarily as ND and mostly below f4. I am sure that if it was not meant to be used as an ND, there would not be an ND-function let alone an ND ONLY-function. Off cause if you dial it up to beyond where the recommendation stops, then you start to see some funny stuff, mostly colour wise. What articfacts are you talking about Björn?
Click to expand...

Check the red manual. The artfiact ar listed there some odd looking DOF stuff when shooting wide open. Lot of people tend to use NDs to be able to shoot more open.... then the artifacts kicks in. But sure if you are at 5.6 and use it moderatly then it works great.
 
More thoughts: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1yb4hg13XH7pBY69eEvo9b7275ofJtybv

D.E.B. actually works in underexposed areas and gets rid of the weird nasty magenta. I thought on the Helium sensor it just made a blocky noise (not really changing much of the magenta).

However, when looking at Sony Venice it doesn't seem to have the weird nasty magenta when underexposed, could be because of better black shading? (auto-black shading)

Never-the-less, fixable with D.E.B. just another step in post it seems.
 
David just saw this.


After raising the image up and with a lite correction, even before the heavy noise reduction, I didn't see much magenta in her black pants and only a little in her grey top.



A001_C015_0722_T4.0000022_F_S000.0000000.jpg



david_4_1.3.2.jpg
 
Last edited:
rand thompson said:
David just saw this.


After raising the image up and with a lite correction, even before the heavy noise reduction, I didn't see much magenta in her black pants and only a little in her grey top.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I dunno what the mods did, but they messed up some threads, including this one so I don't think it updates properly.

Anywho, nice correction. I was trying to push the sensor for under exposure. It's hard to get a true sense because I would never really shoot anyone's skin this underexposed unless I was trying to hide them in shadow, but more so it's the shirt that is strange to me because if it's not magenta it has some artifacts and blocky textures.

I've been working so much that I have had time to properly test the sensor. Going to be doing some more, hopefully soon.
 
David, Yeah

A lot of threads are being moved around, I think so that things stay "freshen up'' around here, kind of like a Reduser Spring cleaning. I had to track down a couple of threads myself. I figured this was a test to see how magenta would rear its ugly head on the Monstro sensor when the shadows were raised significantly.


I think its just some of the inherent design of the Monstro Sensor, Which like the Sony Venice, Has its strengths and weaknesses. Here is Pic and a video of a test of the Sony Venice by Cinematographer Alfonso Parra AEC, ADFC and at about the 19:44 minute mark he discusses his findings of the noise characteristics of the Sony Venice, especially how the RGB channels remain so close together in the shadows because there is the same amount of noise in all three channels.


Screenshot_199.png



 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top