Wooden Camera PL Mount

[Miguel Gallagher]

Has anybody used the x aluminium PL mount for Epic and Scarlet? I couldn't see the PL mount in al on the Red site and can't justify the Ti version at this stage.

http://x.com/RED/New-Releases-RED/PL-Mount-Epic-Scarlet.html

I guess the biggest difference is that this mount doesn't 'speak' to the camera. I can't see this as a huge difference but any thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks
Miguel

 

[Miguel Gallagher]

The thread keeps changing the brand to x in the thread. Are we not allowed to talk about other brands here? Confused.

 

[Daniel Pearson]

W00den Camera has been banned due to legal back and forths, so the forum changes it to an X

 

[Miguel Gallagher]

Ah okay that explains it. I didn't know that.

 

[Miguel Gallagher]

Thanks Daniel.

 

[Tom Greenberg]

I've used one of the WC mounts. It works just fine. It is much lighter weight construction than the RED TI PL mount. If I were using longer and heavier studio zooms, the TI mount would be a must have. For shorter zooms and most primes, the WC mount should work great.

 

[Adam Johnson]

I use it with my dragon. Works great

 

[Miguel Gallagher]

Thanks guys.

 

[Tommaso Alvisi]

Do you guys have problems with internal reflection with the WC PL mount?

It hasn't an internal ridged baffle, the TI PL Mount has it.

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

Do you guys have problems with internal reflection with the WC PL mount?

It hasn't an internal ridged baffle, the TI PL Mount has it.

thats why its 350 bucks.NO i/ technology..doesnt support electronics

 

[Tommaso Alvisi]

I know, I don't use i/ or LDS, I'm just worried about internal reflections...compare the inside of the RED TI PL Mount to the WC one...

 

[Lee Saxon]

thats why its 350 bucks.NO i/ technology..doesnt support electronics

At $350 I wouldn't expect i/ or LDS, but I would certainly expect baffling. Fotodiox gives us baffling in $30 adapters.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I have both and can do a test later tonight.

 

[Tommaso Alvisi]

wow that would be great Bob!

 

[Cedric Gall]

I have both and can do a test later tonight.

So, this was long ago, but did you ever do that test? Should I expect internal reflection issues with the WC mount?

 

[jpmcabe]

So, this was long ago, but did you ever do that test? Should I expect internal reflection issues with the WC mount?

Ive never had an issue- will sell mine for 200 if you want.... just got a TI back when upgraded cam...

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Ive never had an issue- will sell mine for 200 if you want.... just got a TI back when upgraded cam...

I haven't used mine much, but I'm also interested in the internal reflections. Has this been an issue for people or not? Right now I'm using the Canon EF mount with my CN-E lenses, but whenever I'm about to do something bigger I will rent anamorphics or spherical higher priced lenses and it would be nice to know if the WC PL has ny problems or if it's fine except for the obvious lack of electronics. I haven't compared mine to the regular Red PL yet so I'm not sure what else is different.

 

[Evgenios Zosimov]

NO issues here, no internal reflections spotted either. As for the readings, me nor my clients ever used PL lenses with readouts. FP never complained about that either. So far so good.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I use the WC one when I want a lighter rig. Works great

 

[Christoffer Glans]

NO issues here, no internal reflections spotted either. As for the readings, me nor my clients ever used PL lenses with readouts. FP never complained about that either. So far so good.

Yeah, I don't see a need for electronics for PL unless someone makes lenses with cinema-grade internal motors that works like still lenses (without stepping) and when speaking of electronics for current lenses it's mostly about modern technically perfect lenses, but most of the time I use nice old glass for PL, that's where it shines. My Canon CN-Es work great if I want a sharp "perfect" image.