Micro35 (original thread)

John Sandel · February 6th, 2005, 06:22 PM

"If I can get my hands on another camera (XL2) I'll make sure the rail setup is adjustable for those as well."

Thank, James. I'd volunteer my XL2, but I'm in LA. Worse comes to worst, you might rent one for a day. And please do post here when you've worked out the XL2 fitting.

I have several thousand more questions (to quote an old movie), but I'll wait to see your how-to-build guide before I ask them.

Leo Mandy · February 6th, 2005, 06:22 PM

Also, I am really digging those SLR mounts that you got - they really enhance the look and obviously stability of the piece!

John Sandel · February 6th, 2005, 08:51 PM

James, the chart examples at your website are a big help. In the photos, the ground-glass labeled "60" looks sharpest, but only by a very slight amount. I'm wary of making a buy decision based on online images.

I'd have a much easier time judging your gadget if you were able to burn your results to a demo disc. What would you charge for that?

James Hurd · February 6th, 2005, 09:14 PM

John,
With the overwhelming response for units and guides, I won't have the time to setup a DVD at this point. I've had several offers to produce a DVD, so I may end up taking one of them up on it.

It seems that the 40 has gotten the most votes with 60 coming in second. Since 40 was the bottom of the samples, I'll probably have the glass company make a 10 and 20 for some tests. Considerable light was saved using the 40. I'm curious on the 10 and 20 now.

Compared to the DVX only shots, I'm very excited about the results of the adapter.

Thanks all for your responses!

John Sandel · February 6th, 2005, 11:07 PM

James, do the numbers in the ground-glass names correspond to any feature (e.g., dimensions, smoothness, light dispersion or transmission)? Or are they just identifiers, like stock numbers?

James Hurd · February 6th, 2005, 11:50 PM

Identifiers from the glass company.

Probably a setting on the machine...

Ivan Hurtado · February 6th, 2005, 11:57 PM

The 40 takes less light away and gives more options to black and grey. But i was surprise with the DIY one! It looks amazing and i would think is even better than the 80.

The only problem is the sharpness. But i think is not a big one considering it was a chart test and not a video footage with movements and fast changing conditions. Is this a focus problem or it really takes the sharpness away? because it can help to smooth some wrinkles and skin tones (like light bruises and hair spots ;-) ) and eliminate this video crispiness that show more detail than the wanted.

Nice ones indeed. I love it. I started to imagine for a second how the following generations will be or the cameras wich are going to be wearing this adapter (like the Z1...) and my smile is reaching my ears...

Some people will say if you are going to have the Z1 go for the mini, but it looks their value is far overpriced as the micro will have better relation value for the money. (forgive my mistakes; its just the time, i need some sleep)

By the way, no Z1 nor anything till i see what happens in NAB. Probably dealers are going o be swimming in cameras till then...

James Hurd · February 7th, 2005, 12:16 AM

Thanks Ivan. I'm sleepy too and the couple of beers aren't helping either.

I admit, the DIY is amazing. But there is a slight hint of rotation at the top of the color bar. The machine made GGs don't exhibit this problem. This could have been the way I made the DIY gg. It was a little 'over-done' if you will. (Not to mention in rolled and bounced around in my garage several times....)

If you compare the DVX shots with the others, the sharpness isn't bad. But you're right, this is what gives it that film look by removing that hard sharp video look. And there are many positive side-effects as you mentioned as well. Just remember, these shots are compressed .jpgs AND no color correction has been done.

When the production footage comes in, I truly believe that everyone will stop questioning the visual characteristics of the adapter.

I think it's up to the filmmaker's vision and talent at this point.

DOF is no longer a problem. Go shoot something!

james

**EDIT**
After editing some images from a (still) photo shoot last week, I've noticed that the Sigma 24-70 shoots soft images compared to my other Canon lens. So I'm sure the lens plays a big role in the sharpness.

Obin Olson · February 7th, 2005, 08:08 AM

hmmm...how can the DVX LCD not be upsidedown in that shot??I bet you took the LCD apart and flipped it!!!

And I feel so stupid for never thinking of this!!!

James Hurd · February 7th, 2005, 09:42 AM

I didn't take anything apart...

Aaron Shaw · February 7th, 2005, 11:38 AM

James how did you get the image to be right side up? Use the nature of a short focal length to flip the image?

It looks good. I voted for the 40. It looks like you are loosing about 100lines of res which isn't too bad (520 on the DVX vs approx 420 with the adapter on).

Jim Lafferty · February 7th, 2005, 12:34 PM

Looks good. I voted the 40.

Kyle Edwards · February 7th, 2005, 05:06 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Aaron Shaw : James how did you get the image to be right side up? Use the nature of a short focal length to flip the image? -->>>

Never heard of the magnet trick?

John Sandel · February 7th, 2005, 05:43 PM

As far as I know, the magnet trick works only on some flip-out LCDs.

James, is this is how you worked around an inverted image? l can't do that with my XL2's viewfinder ...

Steev Dinkins · February 7th, 2005, 06:17 PM

You can mount the XL2 viewfinder on the opposite side, hence flipping the viewfinder. Then the image will display correctly. Not perfect, but workable. This is assuming the micro35 design is not using prisms and whathaveya to correct the image (I don't think it is). Other methods would be modifying a LCD viewfinder to mount upside down or use a monitor on set to do the flip.

However, I'm not sure when a micro35 solution for the XL2 might be available anyway.

Thoughts?

February 6th, 2005, 11:57 PM	#187
Ivan Hurtado Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Granada, Spain Posts: 75	The 40 takes less light away and gives more options to black and grey. But i was surprise with the DIY one! It looks amazing and i would think is even better than the 80. The only problem is the sharpness. But i think is not a big one considering it was a chart test and not a video footage with movements and fast changing conditions. Is this a focus problem or it really takes the sharpness away? because it can help to smooth some wrinkles and skin tones (like light bruises and hair spots ;-) ) and eliminate this video crispiness that show more detail than the wanted. Nice ones indeed. I love it. I started to imagine for a second how the following generations will be or the cameras wich are going to be wearing this adapter (like the Z1...) and my smile is reaching my ears... Some people will say if you are going to have the Z1 go for the mini, but it looks their value is far overpriced as the micro will have better relation value for the money. (forgive my mistakes; its just the time, i need some sleep) By the way, no Z1 nor anything till i see what happens in NAB. Probably dealers are going o be swimming in cameras till then... __________________ IvI

February 6th, 2005, 06:22 PM	#181
John Sandel Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: stately Eldora Road Posts: 386	"If I can get my hands on another camera (XL2) I'll make sure the rail setup is adjustable for those as well." Thank, James. I'd volunteer my XL2, but I'm in LA. Worse comes to worst, you might rent one for a day. And please do post here when you've worked out the XL2 fitting. I have several thousand more questions (to quote an old movie), but I'll wait to see your how-to-build guide before I ask them.

February 6th, 2005, 06:22 PM	#182
Leo Mandy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 749	Also, I am really digging those SLR mounts that you got - they really enhance the look and obviously stability of the piece!

February 6th, 2005, 08:51 PM	#183
John Sandel Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: stately Eldora Road Posts: 386	James, the chart examples at your website are a big help. In the photos, the ground-glass labeled "60" looks sharpest, but only by a very slight amount. I'm wary of making a buy decision based on online images. I'd have a much easier time judging your gadget if you were able to burn your results to a demo disc. What would you charge for that?

February 6th, 2005, 09:14 PM	#184
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	John, With the overwhelming response for units and guides, I won't have the time to setup a DVD at this point. I've had several offers to produce a DVD, so I may end up taking one of them up on it. It seems that the 40 has gotten the most votes with 60 coming in second. Since 40 was the bottom of the samples, I'll probably have the glass company make a 10 and 20 for some tests. Considerable light was saved using the 40. I'm curious on the 10 and 20 now. Compared to the DVX only shots, I'm very excited about the results of the adapter. Thanks all for your responses!

February 6th, 2005, 11:07 PM	#185
John Sandel Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: stately Eldora Road Posts: 386	James, do the numbers in the ground-glass names correspond to any feature (e.g., dimensions, smoothness, light dispersion or transmission)? Or are they just identifiers, like stock numbers?

February 6th, 2005, 11:50 PM	#186
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	Identifiers from the glass company. Probably a setting on the machine...

February 7th, 2005, 12:16 AM	#188
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	Thanks Ivan. I'm sleepy too and the couple of beers aren't helping either. I admit, the DIY is amazing. But there is a slight hint of rotation at the top of the color bar. The machine made GGs don't exhibit this problem. This could have been the way I made the DIY gg. It was a little 'over-done' if you will. (Not to mention in rolled and bounced around in my garage several times....) If you compare the DVX shots with the others, the sharpness isn't bad. But you're right, this is what gives it that film look by removing that hard sharp video look. And there are many positive side-effects as you mentioned as well. Just remember, these shots are compressed .jpgs AND no color correction has been done. When the production footage comes in, I truly believe that everyone will stop questioning the visual characteristics of the adapter. I think it's up to the filmmaker's vision and talent at this point. DOF is no longer a problem. Go shoot something! james EDIT After editing some images from a (still) photo shoot last week, I've noticed that the Sigma 24-70 shoots soft images compared to my other Canon lens. So I'm sure the lens plays a big role in the sharpness.

February 7th, 2005, 08:08 AM	#189
Obin Olson Trustee Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Wilmington NC Posts: 1,414	hmmm...how can the DVX LCD not be upsidedown in that shot??I bet you took the LCD apart and flipped it!!! And I feel so stupid for never thinking of this!!!

February 7th, 2005, 09:42 AM	#190
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	I didn't take anything apart...

February 7th, 2005, 11:38 AM	#191
Aaron Shaw Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 587	James how did you get the image to be right side up? Use the nature of a short focal length to flip the image? It looks good. I voted for the 40. It looks like you are loosing about 100lines of res which isn't too bad (520 on the DVX vs approx 420 with the adapter on).

February 7th, 2005, 12:34 PM	#192
Jim Lafferty Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 636	Looks good. I voted the 40.

February 7th, 2005, 05:06 PM	#193
Kyle Edwards Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: LI, NY Posts: 274	<<<-- Originally posted by Aaron Shaw : James how did you get the image to be right side up? Use the nature of a short focal length to flip the image? -->>> Never heard of the magnet trick?

February 7th, 2005, 05:43 PM	#194
John Sandel Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: stately Eldora Road Posts: 386	As far as I know, the magnet trick works only on some flip-out LCDs. James, is this is how you worked around an inverted image? l can't do that with my XL2's viewfinder ...

February 7th, 2005, 06:17 PM	#195
Steev Dinkins Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 613	You can mount the XL2 viewfinder on the opposite side, hence flipping the viewfinder. Then the image will display correctly. Not perfect, but workable. This is assuming the micro35 design is not using prisms and whathaveya to correct the image (I don't think it is). Other methods would be modifying a LCD viewfinder to mount upside down or use a monitor on set to do the flip. However, I'm not sure when a micro35 solution for the XL2 might be available anyway. Thoughts?