Redrock Micro mattebox problem with 15mm arm and Epic

[Brice Ansel]

To come back to that old thread,
Better than buying another mattebox, I just did cut some long carbon rodes in to two small one.
Here is a pic with a 50mm Summicron and three stages.
As you can see the larger part of the RR MatteBox doesn't touch the rode and can now be adjust up or down with no problem.
Works also with the 28mm Elmarit or the 50mm Nikon F1.4


The irony is, I first bought the shortest RedRock carbon rodes possible, they were too long with such small lenses.
Weird RedRock doesn't propose shorter ones.
Glad I dindn't bought another chunk of metal.
Regards.
B.

[Trevor Meeks]

Weird that Redrock doesn't just correct the problem with their huge bulky mattebox so it can be used normally, without cutting rods.

[Brian Valente]

@Brice we have carbon rails in 2", 4" and 6" now.

@Trevor IU thought you knew any mattebox that supports up to 5.65" filters (including arri MB-20) are designed to hang in front of 15mm lightweight rods. When used with 15mm studio offset or 19mm there is enough space to clear the mattebox and correctly center the lens.


Cheers


Brian

[Trevor Meeks]

With a properly designed mattebox, the filter stage clears the rods and allows you to correctly center the lens. Wow, Brian... really? Blaming customers now for not "knowing" that all 4x5.65 matteboxes have this problem? Just wow...

[Brian Valente]

@Trevor - microMB supports up to 5.65" SQUARE filters.

Any properly designed mattebox that supports 5.65" square filters (as the microMatteBox does), has swing away, and supports centering of the lens on 15mm lightweight will hang in front of the rods. Arri MB-20 is the same way.

To which part of this do you take exception?




Cheers

Brian

[Trevor Meeks]

Communication certainly is key - the clarification of SQUARE makes a bit more sense now. Too bad the incompatibility with 15mm LWS and smaller lenses isn't communicated on the website, as the mattebox is largely marketed toward DSLR shooters who will in most cases be using small still lenses.

[Brian Valente]

@Trevor I'm glad we cleared that up.

We'll look at our website text and see how we can improve there. We make no secret the microMatteBox supports 5.65" square filters. Also I wouldn't say it's 'incompatible' with 15mm lws, you just need to hang it off the end of the rails. We design our baseplates so they can have the rods adjustable front-back and also there is an additional 2.5" of movement on the mattebox swing arm itself, so it's a lot more flexible than 'incompatible' would suggest.

Speaking of communication, it would be really great if you could also focus on clarifying communications along with us, rather than jumping to conclusions and lambasting for something that just needed refinement.



Cheers

Brian

[Mike Garrick]

@ Brian

I believe your MB needs to be clearly labeled as such. As Trevor has indicated there is a problem with the "perception" that your MB is suitable for 15mm. Why ? try to mount a Canon 24 - 70 then switch out to say Leica Summicron 50mm with a FF. If this product is aimed at 19mm market this MB kicks some goals for the dollars. However given the DSMC concept of Red camera's this can create issues for users of still lenses. Look at some of the comments on this thread from other users . As a former owner of your MB I like the build quality ( metal filter trays great!! etc ) but I believe the issue of 15mm rails needs to be addressed, somehow.

P.S. Brice it is not apparent from your pics how you fixed your issue. I assume by cutting the rails you have extended the swing away out to the max. adjustment . Is this correct?

[Brian Valente]

@Mike Got it, thanks for the feedback


Cheers

Brian