Is the redrock M2 adapter any good?

[orre]

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?

[Justin Anderson]

How good is it compared to p+s minipro35?
Can I put in on my dvx 100 without the rod support system?

From what I've seen, equal if not better.

No, it needs the support system.

[AftonGrant]

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.

The first thing you'll notice when using one is that it flips the image upside-down. This will force you to either shoot with the camera upside-down, or turn all your monitors upside-down to watch the image, and then flip it in post. RR has addressed this problem by releasing an attachment that will re-flip the image.

The RR is more of a clip-on system, rather than an integral, solid camera adapting system like the P&S. The rods are the only support for the RR. This can easily produce flex between the camera and adapter, which can distort your image, lose your focus, and cause you to constantly reset the mating between the camera and adapter.

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. I'm sure a DP would be able to tell you the differences in the glass between the two lens types. This difference will be directly related to the quality of your image.

As I said at the beginning, for the price, the RedRock is a decent little system. And honestly, it's not really fair to compare a system that costs $500 to one that costs $8000+. If I were renting, I'd always go with the P&S. If I were buying, I'd get whatever I could afford.

Best Regards.

[orre]

Thanks guys.
As I understand it you can get the adapter with pl-lensmount.
Do you know how many stops it takes?

[Matt Garrett]

In my experience the redrock lost around 1 1/3 stops of light.
You can get it with a pl mounts. The lens gears they sell with very well with still lenses and their follow focus unit.

There are also several other 35mm adapter manufacturers like the brevis and the sgpro, all with different pros and cons.

[Alexander Nikishin]

Hi, has anyone worked with the M2 rr 35mm lensadapter?

The M2 is an invaluable piece of equipment when shooting anything other than 35mm film.

The DOF it grants you makes it well worth its price tag.

Every job I do that isn't shot on film gets the M2 treatment.


How good is it compared to p+s minipro35?

The P&S costs around $10,000 last time I checked, I think that should answer your question.


Can I put in on my dvx 100 without the rod support system?

Yes you can, if you use the hard mount adapter ring, but I wouldn't recommend it due to the weight it puts on the DVX's front threading.

If you'd like a great example of what the M2 can do, check out Illegal.

http://www.redrockmicro.com/samples.html

And if you like the handheld Camera work of Illegal, remember, I'm available for hire. :bye2:

[Chris Nuzzaco]

I've used the Red Rock before. Its not too bad, but I hate the soft edges the thing produces. Just kills me. I have seen some really sharp test footage from the SGPro Rev.2 Now thats looking like a sweet adapter, and its actually cheaper than the RR if I remember right. Right now I shoot with an Andromeda DVX100, so my ISO rating is already really low, I thought about buying an adapter, but having a video camera with an ISO rating of about 80 is a little bit crazy for low budget shows, so I'll just rent it when I need it.

EDIT: I'm also not too fond of the added noise the adapter produces in the images, they say it adds that film grain feel, which it does, but I don't always want that much grain on top of footage that is already struggling without any adapters sitting in front of the stock lens.

[AftonGrant]

How good is it compared to p+s minipro35?

The P&S costs around $10,000 last time I checked, I think that should answer your question.


Alexander, do be sure to qualify your response as it is not a simple 1:1 comparison. The RedRock is not simply a P&S with a 90% discount. The differences between the two go far beyond the price.

Just to be clear, I think both are great products and both fit a very defined niche.

[Alexander Nikishin]

Alexander, do be sure to qualify your response as it is not a simple 1:1 comparison. The RedRock is not simply a P&S with a 90% discount. The differences between the two go far beyond the price.

Just to be clear, I think both are great products and both fit a very defined niche.

Then would you mind clarifying the differences between the two since the differences are far and beyond.

Aside from the prism and integrated PL mount ofcourse.



The RR uses 35mm STILL camera lenses, not 35mm cinema lenses like the P&S.

False, the Redrock has a PL mount for cinema glass.

http://shopping.netsuite.com/s.nl;jsessionid=0a000d4a1f43a2304b46b92e4e94ac2ae3 8b20b9ff2e.e3eSc34RbhyRe34Pa38Ta38Lch90?c=472981&sc=2&category=2

Please qualify your responses as well.

[Larry McKee]

I was a Beta tester for the M2 and have been using it with both cine lenses and Nikon glass. I have clients that don't want anything shot without it. I shot a documentary recently in HD with the M2 on my HVX200. After the shoot the director confided, "Larry, I have to tell you. I have been doing this for 20 years and these are the most spectacular images of any project I have ever been associated with."

I have never used the P+S Mini35 so I don't have an opinion on it. My clients are very happy with the results we are getting with the M2, so I haven't bothered to try anything else.

[Larry McKee]

Alexander, I picked up a copy of the "Illegal" DVD from Jamey at NAB. Very nice work. I saw some frame grabs over at DVXUSER that were posted as the project was being edited and was hoping I would get to see the finished product. I was not disappointed.

Again, nice work.

[AftonGrant]

Then would you mind clarifying the differences between the two since the differences are far and beyond.

Aside from the prism and integrated PL mount ofcourse.

Please qualify your responses as well.

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.

[Bruce Allen]

If you'd like a great example of what the M2 can do, check out Illegal.

http://www.redrockmicro.com/samples.html

And if you like the handheld Camera work of Illegal, remember, I'm available for hire. :bye2:

I've seen Illegal - camera work is excellent. Congrats!

I know we have differences of opinion on the HV20... guess I'll have to rent a HVX if I want to work with you? Or wait for your Red ;)

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Alexander Nikishin]

Alexander, I picked up a copy of the "Illegal" DVD from Jamey at NAB. Very nice work. I saw some frame grabs over at DVXUSER that were posted as the project was being edited and was hoping I would get to see the finished product. I was not disappointed.

Again, nice work.

Thank you for the compliment, it comforts me to know that people enjoy my work. :biggrin:

[Alexander Nikishin]

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.

Please do inform me of the techinical differences, I'd really like to to know so that I can, as you put it, "qualify my response".


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.

And those $8,000 worth of differences are?

[Alexander Nikishin]

I've seen Illegal - camera work is excellent. Congrats!

I know we have differences of opinion on the HV20... guess I'll have to rent a HVX if I want to work with you? Or wait for your Red ;)

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

lol, keep me away from that cute little 1080p bugger and wer'e ready to shoot! :sarcasm:

[AftonGrant]

Please do inform me of the techinical differences, I'd really like to to know so that I can, as you put it, "qualify my response".

And those $8,000 worth of differences are?

Hey man, I don't know exactly why this has become so heated. Someone originally asked the differences between the RR and the P&S. When you said the difference in price should answer their question, I simply suggested to perhaps explain WHY the two cost as much as they do, as price is not the only difference.

It's really not my obligation to explain every dollar of difference between the two products. I've given a quick overview of my practical experiences with them. The consumer can research as much or as little as they want and spend their money however they like.

If you would like me to provide a real-world explanation of the $8000 difference, I will. Every project I've worked on with the RR (and all have had the SLR mount) has required about 20 minutes extra setup time. This time goes to the initial mounting of the system, prepping either the camera or the monitors to all be used upside-down, mounting lenses with the geared adapter rings, etc. Throughout the day, because of the slight flex in the system, after each shot we had to check and adjust the system as it would often go out of alignment. Also, any lens change required us to move the focus ring from one lens to the next. Granted, all these delays were short individually, but combined, probably totaled 15min by the end of the day. So, end of day, the RR alone had added about 35min of production time.

Take your typical $500,000 music video (which one of them was), with approx $300,000 going towards principal photography, shooting over 2 days for 12 hrs per day. Hourly cost of production is $12,500. Cost per minute is $208. An additional 35 minutes per day costs production $7,291 per day, $14,583 for the two days.

I know these sound like sensational numbers, but I assure you they're not. Production time is extremely expensive. And those delays aren't fabrications, they're true delays I have experienced on more than one set. You can easily say a thousand things might delay production, which is true, but the times I've worked with the RR, there have ALWAYS been small accommodations that had to constantly be made.

Again, I truly do think the RR is a great product. It has found a niche that is perfect for it. I feel the same about the P&S. I do not feel the two niches are the same.

Happy shooting to all!

[Zakaree Sandberg]

Bottom line is there is not much of a difference. I have used both adapters and would honestly rather use a redrock or cinemek.
The image flip is the only main difference (more light loss)..

people purchased a P+S for 10 grand.. and are now bummed that some college kid can have the same device for under a grand... therefore the guys who spent dime on an adapter are making out to be a "professional" tool.

RR just goes to prove that something doesnt need to cost 10 grand to be professional or worthy. I made my own adapter over a year ago for about 300 bucks.. it looks fantastic!!

[Zakaree Sandberg]

It has found a niche that is perfect for it. I feel the same about the P&S. I do not feel the two niches are the same.



What niches? an adapter has no correlation on look or feel (unless ur using a special screen with more grain or no grain...

they both capture the image from the 35mm lens.

[jaadgy akanni]

The way I've always seen it, and simply said: the P&S adapter is an expensive absurdity.

[PaulClements]

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.

[AftonGrant]

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.

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

[PaulClements]

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

[Justin Anderson]

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.

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.

[Justin Anderson]

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.

I think that happy medium would have been the G35, had it ever been launched.

[Costelloe Michael]

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

[PaulClements]

I think that happy medium would have been the G35, had it ever been launched.

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?

[Zakaree Sandberg]

I think that happy medium would have been the G35, had it ever been launched.

i have inside information regarding this..

hold your breath from 1-2 months and youll see what i mean

[JW Lee]

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.

[Matt Garrett]

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.

[Justin Anderson]

i have inside information regarding this..

hold your breath from 1-2 months and youll see what i mean

well I'm already blue in the face from the last year and a half so whats another 1-2 months. ;)

[Justin Anderson]

Bizarre, I wonder if their designs infringed on someones patent elsewhere. Did anything more come from it?

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)

[Alexander Nikishin]

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.

Exactly.

[Scott Webster]

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 (http://littlebrother.co.nz/main/whats-up/index.php)

Scroll down to Little Brother TV Ad

[C.H.Haskell]

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.

[Poi Boy]

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

[Ramesh Jai]

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.

[Paul Kalbach]

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?

[Júlio Taubkin]

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...

[Omnius]

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?

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


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.

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 (http://www.zgc.com/zgc.nsf/c7a682995edb4e7585256b4d001ebd57/2031a885fd32c263852572c70059af71?OpenDocument)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

[AftonGrant]

"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.


Great post, man. You reiterated many of the points I was trying to make - from a different perspective. My comment about the still lenses probably should have been clarified some. That is the way it comes from the factory. The PL lens mount is an additional cost - it'll almost double the price of just the adapter itself.

I was speaking from a practical perspective, as one who has encountered the equipment many times in the field. Anyone purchasing the RR is probably budget conscious to begin with (we all are to a degree). In turn, I just don't think the majority of owners choose to go with the PL option. With the additional cost of the mount, not to mention the costs of the compatible lenses, the PL option suddenly isn't quite so optional.

I am just an operator which means I arrive on set to use whatever camera setup production has chosen. I have yet to work with the RR using anything but the SLR lenses.

[Larry McKee]

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

Is it possible you have the ground glass mounted backwards? It should have the textured side to the front with the smooth side towards the camera. If it is installed properly, there may be a calibration issue. Try using spacers to move the GG forward and backward. A fraction of a millimeter can make a huge difference in image sharpness.

I don't understand the other issues you are having. My M2 produces sharp images edge to edge no matter the focal length. I have shot a lot of projects with it and haven't needed anything larger than a 1K tungsten for most interiors. I am shooting with the 72mm achromatic lens and F1.4 Cine and Nikon SLR glass.

[Júlio Taubkin]

Well, I never shot with cine lenses... I'm sure a 1.4 wide angle would help me a lot! Wich camera are you using, the HVX?

[Larry McKee]

Yes, sorry, forgot that part. Been using the HVX for the past year and a half with the M2. Before that I used it with the DVX.

[Júlio Taubkin]

Totally. I'm going to bring it back to the lab (again!) and see if I can make it work better! I surely like the images I get from it, when everything is working well...

[Omnius]

I am just an operator which means I arrive on set to use whatever camera setup production has chosen. I have yet to work with the RR using anything but the SLR lenses.

I couldn't imagine what you go through operating a steadicam with a RR setup there Buddy.
I can totally understand your preference for the P+S in this matter ( and in others ).

[AftonGrant]

I couldn't imagine what you go through operating a steadicam with a RR setup there Buddy.
I can totally understand your preference for the P+S in this matter ( and in others ).

It's far from ideal, that's for sure. The camera must be mounted upside-down since turning the Steadicam monitor upside down is not an option (at least on my rig anyway). Cameras aren't generally built to be mounted upside-down, but most Steadicam ops have a collection of different brackets and widgets to accommodate different situations.

The nuisance throughout the day as I've already said was the lack of rigidity. Now, we've determined a threaded mount would have helped, but with the amount of motion undergone on such a rig as a Steadicam, 100% rigidity is crucial and I'm still not convinced even a threaded mount would've solved the problem completely.

Fortunately, a Steadicam by nature is always kept generally at body level where adjustments can be made when necessary. I couldn't imagine operating with the rig off of something else with a lot of movement that is not so easily accessible: jib, crane, car mount, remote head, etc. The time constraints of production just don't allow for ongoing technical maintenance. If you're in charge of a piece of equipment, you want to be 100% confident that it is working properly.

Taking the focus/alignment issue for example, if something is off it's not like it's extremely obvious there's a problem right away. Nothing snaps and can just be swapped out for a replacement. Chances are, the problem isn't noticed until after a bunch of footage is shot. That can be very costly.

I'd have to say one of the worst feelings an individual can ever feel is being on set and a piece of equipment for which you are responsible breaks. The entire production then waits on you to come up with a solution. That is a very, very, VERY heavy weight. Seconds seem like minutes, minutes like hours, and hours seem like...well, you're unemployed. Believe me, you will give your annual salary to get out of that situation as soon as possible.

This is why trust in my equipment is paramount. It just needs to work. It can't work only if you do this.... or if you get this... or if you adjust this. It needs to be set up and then trusted to just plain work.

I do wish to once again state that I believe the RedRock is an excellent value. I truly don't prefer one over the other since I just don't think they can equally be compared. They have different customer and user bases. However, I felt there was a lot of criticism thrown at the P&S due to just its price, so I thought I'd take its side a bit.

Peace!