Differences between the Mini35 and M2 etc. at DVinfo.net

Dan McCain · February 3rd, 2006, 12:40 PM

Could any here please elaborate on what are the differences in the P+S Technik Mini35 adapter and the M2 and others. I am very interested in terms of image quality. Please no speculation I would like to hear from those who have tested both systems.

Jay Rodriguez · February 7th, 2006, 10:47 AM

sure, it's the cost that's the big diff.

Matthew Nayman · February 7th, 2006, 01:04 PM

Mini 35 registers an upright image... M2 is upside down.
Mini 35 loses more light but runs off camera batteries.
M2 has AA batts, but is smaller and lighter.

Both can have the same lens mounts, etc.

Not sure about the GG

Cody Dulock · February 7th, 2006, 08:22 PM

the M2 runs on a 9v battery or an ac adapter. people have also adapter portable batteries to it as well that seems to work. the M2 is very robust like the P+S technik adapter, so its REALLY hard to break it. its a modular design as well, so instead of buying a whole new adapter, there are upgrades. as of now the only upgrades have been the imaging element (now the cinescreen, which rocks!). also, the bokeh on the M2 is really good with the cinescreen, which comes with the adapter (in my opinion).

as far as image quality goes, every adapter has its own feel, and thats something you will have to decide on. i just cant tell you whats the best and whats the worst, because its all subjective. another thing to keep in mind is if its a static (stationary ground glass, which can result in more visible grain that doesnt move [grain in film moves]), vibrating, oscillating, and rotating designed adapters. redrocks M2 rotates the cinescreen, which results in a blurred grain.

if you are curious about footage of the M2, visit www.redrockmicro.com/forum/

i've only had the M2 and homemade adapters, so i cannot speak of other adapters.

Cody Dulock · February 7th, 2006, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Nayman

Mini 35 registers an upright image... M2 is upside down.
Mini 35 loses more light but runs off camera batteries.
M2 has AA batts, but is smaller and lighter.

Both can have the same lens mounts, etc.

Not sure about the GG

matthew, i believe you are thinking of the DIY version of the micro35. the M2 is very different. just thought i would point that out.

February 3rd, 2006, 12:40 PM	#1
Dan McCain Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 65	Differences between the Mini35 and M2 etc. Could any here please elaborate on what are the differences in the P+S Technik Mini35 adapter and the M2 and others. I am very interested in terms of image quality. Please no speculation I would like to hear from those who have tested both systems. __________________ Dan McCain Owner/Operator Mini35 Package Atlanta, GA www.danmccainproductions.com

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

February 7th, 2006, 10:47 AM	#2
Jay Rodriguez Regular Crew Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 80	sure, it's the cost that's the big diff.

February 7th, 2006, 01:04 PM	#3
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	Mini 35 registers an upright image... M2 is upside down. Mini 35 loses more light but runs off camera batteries. M2 has AA batts, but is smaller and lighter. Both can have the same lens mounts, etc. Not sure about the GG

February 7th, 2006, 08:22 PM	#4
Cody Dulock Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: arlington, texas Posts: 420	the M2 runs on a 9v battery or an ac adapter. people have also adapter portable batteries to it as well that seems to work. the M2 is very robust like the P+S technik adapter, so its REALLY hard to break it. its a modular design as well, so instead of buying a whole new adapter, there are upgrades. as of now the only upgrades have been the imaging element (now the cinescreen, which rocks!). also, the bokeh on the M2 is really good with the cinescreen, which comes with the adapter (in my opinion). as far as image quality goes, every adapter has its own feel, and thats something you will have to decide on. i just cant tell you whats the best and whats the worst, because its all subjective. another thing to keep in mind is if its a static (stationary ground glass, which can result in more visible grain that doesnt move [grain in film moves]), vibrating, oscillating, and rotating designed adapters. redrocks M2 rotates the cinescreen, which results in a blurred grain. if you are curious about footage of the M2, visit www.redrockmicro.com/forum/ i've only had the M2 and homemade adapters, so i cannot speak of other adapters.