Nikon Lens Adapter

[Stephen Williams]

Actually, we have what

«collimnation is not needed everytime you change the mount... a collimnator is just used to adjust your back-focus if something gets knocked out of alignment.»

Hi Emanuel,

With all due respect I don't agree with that statement. With a 35mm lens at F5.6 it is unimportant, but an 18mm @1.3 is a different story.

In any case how would you know after changing the mount that it had not been knocked out of alignment by 1 apec of dust?

Stephen

 

[Emanuel A.]

Stephen,

As I already said: you're the experts...

My point is: maybe Jim had changed something on the way you're used to -- this is a new camera design, after all! So, let's hope Jim is right!

 

[Finner]

My point is: maybe Jim had changed something on the way you're used to -- this is a new camera design, after all! So, let's hope Jim is right!

Unless Jim is able to change dust being on Earth ( I am sure their are some "FANBOY'S" ready to say he can) then I see no way of changing a mount being something that you would not have to be very careful with.

Take note that I am not saying that swapping mounts will not be able to be done by us users. I just feel very strongly that you will have to be very careful when doing it.

As for my camera it will ship with a PL mount and I doubt very highly that I will ever swap it with another mount.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Go back to DSLR experience and the latest anti-dust system implementation in the Sony Alpha camera:
"One of the more interesting features of the camera is the new anti-dust system for the image sensor. Many long time DSLR users know the problem - sensor dust. When changing lenses it is inevitable that a minor degree of dust enters...find its way to the sensor filter surface. The dust will show up as faint blobs in images which naturally accumulate over time and it´s an annoying task to remove these traces via an imaging application. Cleaning the sensor yourself is possible but it´s not exactly a fun aspect to do so and there´ll be always some images affected before you become aware of the problem. In order to provide some protection Sony implemented two improvements - a special anti-static coating applied to the low-pass filter in front of the sensor and a mechanism to shake off dust by taking advantage of the image stabilizer. This is similar to Olympus´ well-proven anti-dust system but the shake frequency isn´t quite as high thus less efficient. Unlike Olympus the Alpha activates the anti-dust shaker when switching off the camera. You may debate whether this is smart or not but this way it has no negative side-effect on the startup time of the camera."
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/dslr/sony_alpha_100/index_sony.html

Also brand new Canon 400D has got built-in anti-dust system.

Sooner or later the RED should get its own built-in anti-dust system(??!)

 

[chuck colburn]

Go back to DSLR experience and the latest anti-dust system implementation in the Sony Alpha camera:
"One of the more interesting features of the camera is the new anti-dust system for the image sensor. Many long time DSLR users know the problem - sensor dust. When changing lenses it is inevitable that a minor degree of dust enters...find its way to the sensor filter surface. The dust will show up as faint blobs in images which naturally accumulate over time and it´s an annoying task to remove these traces via an imaging application. Cleaning the sensor yourself is possible but it´s not exactly a fun aspect to do so and there´ll be always some images affected before you become aware of the problem. In order to provide some protection Sony implemented two improvements - a special anti-static coating applied to the low-pass filter in front of the sensor and a mechanism to shake off dust by taking advantage of the image stabilizer. This is similar to Olympus´ well-proven anti-dust system but the shake frequency isn´t quite as high thus less efficient. Unlike Olympus the Alpha activates the anti-dust shaker when switching off the camera. You may debate whether this is smart or not but this way it has no negative side-effect on the startup time of the camera."
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/dslr/sony_alpha_100/index_sony.html

Also brand new Canon 400D has got built-in anti-dust system.

Sooner or later the RED should get its own built-in anti-dust system(??!)

That would be spiffy! In the mean time check the gate.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Unless Jim is able to change dust being on Earth ( I am sure their are some "FANBOY'S" ready to say he can) then I see no way of changing a mount being something that you would not have to be very careful with.

Take note that I am not saying that swapping mounts will not be able to be done by us users. I just feel very strongly that you will have to be very careful when doing it.

As for my camera it will ship with a PL mount and I doubt very highly that I will ever swap it with another mount.

I understand your concerns and as matter of fact we should be grateful for your wise words anyway. Also 'cause there are some other purchases where we must well know what expects us.

As you well know, I'm buying a stabilizer for example. Where the weight has a relevant role to deal with. Going with the Flyer, for instance, doesn't give enough or comfortable space to think on a PL zoom lens (even so far so compact the RED zoom will be). The same will be possible to equate on the 300mm purchase now when the zoom won't be available so soon as late 2007 and the majority will use SLR lenses until then.

Having such easy trick can solve a lot of hassles. I'd say this will be a business itself. I'm sure Jim knows it and taking his own words I'd add he seems very sure of the difficulties and how to deal with. For the RED business sakes. Ours and concerning the RED revenue(s), as well.

 

[Brook Willard]

My point was to comment on the simplicity of the change. It has been discussed in the past that there may be something "different" about the mount changing - something that doesn't require the kind of infinitely calibrated clean-room experience we're all used to. While I have not personally swapped lens mounts, I have witnessed the process firsthand and know the level of precision required. Prior discussion on the subject has made it seem as though it will be a job for any capable AC on location - not for a bunny in a clean room.

I guess we'll see with time.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Prior discussion on the subject has made it seem as though it will be a job for any capable AC on location - not for a bunny in a clean room.

I guess we'll see with time.

Hi,

Any capable AC on location with a depth gauge and training could change a film camera mount on location. However the depth gauge could damage the sensor on any digital camera.

When I use a Viper with digiprimes I use a sharpmax to check backfocus.

Stephen

 

[Finner]

As you well know, I'm buying a stabilizer for example. Where the weight has a relevant role to deal with. Going with the Flyer, for instance, doesn't give enough or comfortable space to think on a PL zoom lens (even so far so compact the RED zoom will be). The same will be possible to equate on the 300mm purchase now when the zoom won't be available so soon as late 2007 and the majority will use SLR lenses until then.

I would not be too worid about swapping mounts being that tough for the application you are planning. Where the problem comes in is some people had talked in the past of how they would shoot one shot with a ziess pl mount and then move into the close up with a mount change and a nikon and then a little later in the day get an adapter for a cannon (which this kind of thought is crazy because you would get such unmatched lens looks that your project would look like crap.)

Mainly what I am trying to state is that you make sure you take changing a mount very very seriously and don't tell producers or directors that changing the mount is a simple 2 minute thing. If you put the pressure of a fast on set mount change on yourself or your focus puller sooner or later you will have big problems. I have found in this bussiness if you tell directors or producers that something is a big technical job that has to be done very presisely they will get off your back and give you the time to do it right and if you or your assistant gets it done faster you look like a hero. If you say it is a quick easy job and you take even a little longer time then you tell them they will be on your back non-stop and the chance of making a mistake becomes that much greater. Then if a mistake is made by rushing it and the mistake is found later the next day then more then likely they will NEVER hire you again (Yes its harsh but it's how this bussiness seems to work).

I would say "Do not take changing mounts lightly and anyone who tells you to not worry about it and that you can rush is giving you very bad advice. For the sake of your carreer everytime you do a mount swap make sure you take the time to do everything in your power to do it very cautiously."

 

[Emanuel A.]

I follow your wise advices.

As Brook said: the time will tell. And Jim as well! We are waiting for his input. I mean from the RED delivery and not exactly only promises. But as Alexander would say: In RED we trust!

The point is: with RED there will be a real practice for the media convergence. And reading these boards, it's easy to see how these times are changing. Any PhD researcher on a film history and aesthetics studies basis might easily guess what we can find over here: different levels of moviemaking and film work.

For example, im my case, I'll be RED shooter but director for sure and as well (without mention the screenwriting and production jobs where I've been working since I finished the law school , my Master in Media Management, my both degrees in editing and directing). As we can see, the multivalency will be the field of many RED shooters (even if not for all).

 

[Finner]

Hi Emanuel

After you sent me the PM about looking in to buying a steady-cam and seeing your other points I am a little confused. It seems like you are saying that you are interested in directing, editing, DOP and steady cam work as well. I just thought I would mention a few things I have noticed. To be good at everything you mention would be very hard. I currently work as a Director/shooter and splitting thoughts to do a good job at both is a real challenge. I have met a lot of people who do multiple jobs but your choices are very spread out. In fact I personally have never even met a single Steady-cam/DOP guy. The reason for this I think is because being a really good Steady guy takes a lot of work and practice. It is clear to see that you have quite a passion for filmaking but I think you should consider getting more focused before buying a steady-cam. I think you will regret buying a bunch of different specialty job film equipment. Take some time and decide what job you really want to do and focus in on that area. You will be much more successful if you have a focused plan then by trying to do everything.

Some steady-cam guys may be able to add some insight further into this.

 

[Mike the beginner]

Really good points brought up in this thread

Here's my take on it. The main reason (i think) red has given us the opportunity to use different mounts is simply because of the number of people that already own various lenses that are not PL mount. Choice is good right!

It also allows the use of a cheaper set up for those on a tight budget, but have the necessary skills to utilise the cheap still lenses.

It is becoming clear now that the additional mounts will not be similar to the usual mounts that some of us expected ie, a simple flange plate with screws! Exactly what that entails no one but red knows? I happent to think that because of this the mounts will obviously be more expensive than the usual prices for a cheap mount (whatever that is?). I think the idea is to change the mounts when you change the type of production you are doing rather than changing from say nikon mount/lens to PL mount lens etc.

That does not mean you cannot change the mount whenever you like but as stated it will not be entirely risk free.

The more i learn the more i am being swayed strongly to sticking to the PL mount system that comes with the camera. Yes the expense of using PL Cine lenses are considerable, but for my part i have a massive learning curve. Plenty of practice with a proper cine lens i hope will advance my learning curve faster than messing about with cheap still lenses that require even greater skill to track focus with than cine lenses.

My only concern is whether the value of traditional 35mm cine lenses will in fact hold their value? All the evidence says they do and will hold their value long after you have purchased them. However we all know from experience that when something becomes available to a much wider group of people those at the top simply move the goalposts. Whats the+ chances of 70mm lenses becoming the new cine 35mm lens of choice for the big boys?

Michael

 

[Emanuel A.]

Yes Finner you are a little confused! I didn't say I would/will be a steadicam operator! (Nevertheless, I'll play with that , be sure of that! Who knows if afterwards I'll do a change of career?... )

I said: the polyvalence/multivalency is/will be an imperative for many RED buyers.

In my case, I'll be shooter/director, aside the screenwriting task and my work as producer.

I've been working as lecturer/teacher/instructor etc where I've been in touch with dozens of professionals from all the fields...and learned with them.

I have my own moviemaking business, several (distinctive) companies (or structures) where I'm taking the verticalization route (for sure, you can't know what my work is). I just need to know how each department works where I have my money invested.

In a regular basis we own all the gear with which we're used to work. Even when we hire people from outside as always happens when we need. But we prefer to care of our training policy regarding any personelle. When we invite someone to give instruction here is in order to leave the seed among our staff. Concerning the stabilizer operation, it's a common truth what you said and of course there was and there is no doubts there. Both agree.

My objection is just for the rainbow reason. There are different levels of moviemaking -- that's what I said. My own: art work. And so many methods or ways to get the right place there.

We also work as a (real) cooperative and we are several dozen of professionals crossing different areas of the moviemaking, theatre and other fields to art work related. I hope to have the opportunity to invite you to join one of our workshops in the future as instructor or attendant if you wish. I'm not the typical operator who lives from its gear. The moviemaking is my business (as professional) since 1994, so... But unfortunately, I must play so many keyboards@my_piano... Unfortunately, my dear fellow. However, even not being one-man-show (sometimes it seems so), I wouldn't like to be director (or whatever) in hollywood -- major reason: aesthetical freedom, or more correctly, 'cause both reasons (freedom and aesthetics).

 

[Finner]

Sounds like you have found a job you really love. I understand where you are comming from now.

By the way do you have a website for your co-op. I would be interested in looking at it.

 

[Alex Boothby]

It is odd timing that in the last couple of weeks I had begun to shy away from the idea of using the forthcoming Nikon lens mount for all of the reasons mentioned in this thread. I have a Red zoom reservation and would like to avoid time consuming and technically daunting lens changes.

Unfortunately I am on a limited budget and am looking for affordable PL lens solutions.

Dumb Question - PLEASE HELP: would something like these refurbished Nikon and Canon primes work with RED's PL mount?

http://www.rplens.com/products.htm

At the bottom of the page they sell an adaptor for mounting these Nikon and Canon primes to a P+S Technik mount. Could I simply purchase a Nikon or Canon to PL adaptor instead of changing the physical mount? Could I then change lenses fast and avoid the back focus and alignment issues discussed above. Finner? Stephen? Anyone?

 

[Finner]

Sorry

I don't know anything about thes lenses or if there are adapters to make them work? The site looks pretty informative so if you e-mail them they probably can give you some answers. If you get some info on them throw it up on this thread.

Also I don't think setting up your camera with a NIKON mount would be that bad a THING. I just don't think it is something that a person should adopt and do often. But if you set up your RED to run nikon and change to pl every so often I would think you would run in to very little problems.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Go back to DSLR experience and the latest anti-dust system implementation in the Sony Alpha camera:
"One of the more interesting features of the camera is the new anti-dust system for the image sensor. Many long time DSLR users know the problem - sensor dust. When changing lenses it is inevitable that a minor degree of dust enters...find its way to the sensor filter surface. The dust will show up as faint blobs in images which naturally accumulate over time and it´s an annoying task to remove these traces via an imaging application. Cleaning the sensor yourself is possible but it´s not exactly a fun aspect to do so and there´ll be always some images affected before you become aware of the problem. In order to provide some protection Sony implemented two improvements - a special anti-static coating applied to the low-pass filter in front of the sensor and a mechanism to shake off dust by taking advantage of the image stabilizer. This is similar to Olympus´ well-proven anti-dust system but the shake frequency isn´t quite as high thus less efficient. Unlike Olympus the Alpha activates the anti-dust shaker when switching off the camera. You may debate whether this is smart or not but this way it has no negative side-effect on the startup time of the camera."
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/dslr/sony_alpha_100/index_sony.html

Also brand new Canon 400D has got built-in anti-dust system.

Sooner or later the RED should get its own built-in anti-dust system(??!)

Speaking of the RED ONE dust issues....have a look at the picture below

The original picture and more like this you can find at

http://www.cinematography.net/Red/GreenscreenExposureSeries/RGB_56.tif

I don't know. I am a bit confused. What you think?

 

[Alex Boothby]

Sorry

I don't know anything about thes lenses or if there are adapters to make them work? The site looks pretty informative so if you e-mail them they probably can give you some answers. If you get some info on them throw it up on this thread.

Thanks Finner. But just to clarify - in general - do Nikon to PL Adaptors exist and would they be a fast a safe alternative to replacing the actual mount (ie. always keep the PL mount on RED , but just use quality adaptors to attach your Nikons.) I suspect the answer is yes, but I'm far from adequately informed.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I don't know. I am a bit confused. What you think?

I saw that too and in a couple other of the greenscreen tests. Splotches in the greenscreen color or lighting, obscured by DOF? Dirt on the lens? Dust? Lens fungus? I played with that same picture the other day and it keyed cleanly, but it's something to ponder -- especially with the topic of discussion here.

I plan to use my Nikkor lenses with RED and will be getting the Nikon mount. But I don't expect to change mounts often at all. Only on the rare occasion I decide to rent better glass for a project. And I will do that whole project with rented glass and the PL mount. At some point I hope to switch over to all PL mount hardware, but have to use what's available/affordable to get going, eh?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Thanks Finner. But just to clarify - in general - do Nikon to PL Adaptors exist and would they be a fast a safe alternative to replacing the actual mount (ie. always keep the PL mount on RED , but just use quality adaptors to attach your Nikons.) I suspect the answer is yes, but I'm far from adequately informed.

I know I'm kinda jumping in here, and I have no idea if Nikon to PL adapters exist... But it seems to me that it wouldn't work well, if at all. The distance from the lens base or flange for a Nikon mount is like 46mm or something and for PL mount it's like 52mm. My numbers may be wrong, but I know they're different. If you already figure that the distance on a PL mount is wrong for a Nikon lens, then adding an adapter would make the distance even greater and more incorrect, wouldn't it? So an adapter may let you use the lens, but you would be getting entirely different focal lengths and different coverage of the sensor from what you would expect.