19mm to 15mm studio for follow focus?

[Matthew Rogers]

Except Jeff, if I sent it to Australia, it would only cost me $470 + postage. Not to mention that I could probably have the same thing done in a local shop for cheaper.

If I could find a a FF-3/4 or a Chrosziel unit for under $2500, I'd grab it i a heartbeat. The FF3 I called about today was $3600 and that's way over priced when I can get a FF4 from Abel for $3800.

Matthew

[Curran Giddens]

What about mounting an ET 15mm Top Mount upside down onto a RED 19mm Universal Mount?

It would be like the pic above but a bit higher up. Imagine the 19mm rods at the same level....



EDIT: There may not be enough clearance between the 19mm and 15mm rods.

[Matthew Rogers]

What about mounting an ET 15mm Top Mount upside down onto a RED 19mm Universal Mount?
It would be like the pic above but a bit higher up. Imagine the 19mm rods at the same level....
EDIT: There may not be enough clearance between the 19mm and 15mm rods.

Isn't that spaced at 60mm lightweight spacing? There actually looks like there would be enough room to slide it on the 15mm rods, but on top of the 19mm rods.

I understand why no one has come out with an adapter that would simply convert 15mm studio to 19mm studio because things like matteboxes would be way off. But for follow focuses with swing away arms, it seems like it would work great.

Matthew

[Curran Giddens]

Nope. 15mm Studio. Here is another pic skipping the 15mm Hybrid Studio Clamp. This is all 19mm except the ET 15mm Studio Top Mount mounted upside down onto a Universal Mount. I use the ET 15mm Top Mounts just like a Universal Mount.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm 95% sure that Curran's suggestion would not work for the FF-2. It lets you get the rods on the camera, however they would be located too high and would be centered on the camera rather than offset. It would force the FF-2, aside from being 15+mm too high, it would be pushed 17.5mm to the side.

[Matthew Rogers]

Okay, I see now what you are talking about. When I looked at it earlier I didn't see the 100mm spacing, I saw where it talked about 60mm spacing. But here's something else I found. Basically the exact same thing, but $100 cheaper and holes would have to be tapped: http://www.elementtechnica.com/products/view.php?p=69

Basically, I could take that, have two holes tapped for screws to go into the universal mount, and mount it. However, my worry is that the FF2 looks kinda high, and from the top of the universal mount to the bottom of a RED prime is 1 3/4". From the picture of FF2 I am looking at, it looks like it wouldn't clear the prime:(

Matthew

[Matthew Rogers]

I'm 95% sure that Curran's suggestion would not work for the FF-2. It lets you get the rods on the camera, however they would be located too high and would be centered on the camera rather than offset. It would force the FF-2, aside from being 15+mm too high, it would be pushed 17.5mm to the side.

I'm not worried about it being offset because if I got the hybrid part, I could just have the screw holes machined so the offset isn't off. The sole problem with it is height. As long as it would fit under a RED prime it would work, but I don't know how high it is from the center of the 15mm hole to the top of the FF2 crossbar.

Matthew

[Nelson Goforth]

The Arri MFF-1 can be had as a complete kit for the RED One with 19mm to 15mm adapter from AbelCine for $2K. I'll take one of those over a modded FF-2 any day. For a similar style FF that has a few compromises, the Cinevate Durus is about $1200.

Jeff,

It seems as though the MFF is meant for small diameter lenses, and not for large diameter cine lenses, if I'm reading right. What are the advantages/disadvantages of the MFF versus, say, the Arri FF-4 follow focus?

Thank you,
Nelson

[Mitch Gross]

The MFF-1 is less expensive that the FF-4. Both are designed to fit to lightweight 15mm rods with adapters to then go to studio rods in either 15mm or 19mm. The FF-4 can be used dual-sided. The MFF-1 is very lightweight and compact. The FF-4 uses a different transmission system which is to a higher tolerance than the MFF-1, although the MFF-1 is still quite precise. Both follow focuses clear almost all lenses available.