Matte boxes

[Brian Drysdale]

A good matte box will last years, the cheap stuff just falls apart.

I've got an old Arri (3 x 3 & 3 x4) bellows matte box that must be 20 years old (with the use of larger 4 x 4 filters it's not used anymore), but it's still working wonderfully.

[Gareth Watkins]

Hi Trevor

I've got a TLS Kestrel Matte box for my Z1 and although cheap(ish) it seems sturdy enough and has been fine so far.... (In fact it is the second I have had as the first got stolen with my camera.)

It takes two filters and is light enough to work with just the screw on adapter, although you can get a rod system for it.... It comes with a French flag.

I agree some are just not worth it, but I'm quite happy with the TLS stuff. At the price you can get several of these for the price of some of the others.

I picked mine up from Prokit.co.uk in Chiswick... (a very professional and helpful place)

Regards
Gareth

[Brian Wells]

Matte boxes and filters have a longer useful life than a video camera. They also hold their value better on the second-hand market.

[Michael Maier]

Originally Posted by Drew Curran

Even with this in consideration, they are still way over-priced.

Over priced is a subjective thing. If you ever even touched an Arri matte box, specially the new ones, you will see why they cost what they do.

[Michael Maier]

Originally Posted by Gareth Watkins

Hi Trevor

I've got a TLS Kestrel Matte box for my Z1 and although cheap(ish) it seems sturdy enough and has been fine so far.... (In fact it is the second I have had as the first got stolen with my camera.)

It takes two filters and is light enough to work with just the screw on adapter, although you can get a rod system for it.... It comes with a French flag.

I agree some are just not worth it, but I'm quite happy with the TLS stuff. At the price you can get several of these for the price of some of the others.

TLS are good matte boxes. In my opinion they are as good as Vocas or Chrosziel. They are just not as well known. The one you got (Kestrel) is cheap because it’s an entry level one made for DV, equivalent to a Formatt. But TLS’ higher end stuff like the Hawk 4"x4" and Raven 5.65"x5.65" are top notch gear and cost more than equivalent Chrosziels.

[Ian Mora]

Anybody have any experience with this matte box on an hd100/110? It's obviously not an expensive matte,.....but you never know.

http://www.indiesnap.com/hd.html

[Scott Harper]

Originally Posted by Ian Mora

Anybody have any experience with this matte box on an hd100/110? It's obviously not an expensive matte,.....but you never know.
]

Looks pretty "smengy" in my opinion, but who knows...

[Nate Weaver]

Originally Posted by Ian Mora

Anybody have any experience with this matte box on an hd100/110? It's obviously not an expensive matte,.....but you never know.

http://www.indiesnap.com/hd.html

The filter folder allows tons of light in from the sides, which will cause problems eventually.

In my opinion, the maker of this mattebox hasn't spent any time with a real mattebox from Arriflex or Chrozsiel, and is not aware of the hows and whys of one.

[David Ziegelheim]

Interesting, but the same problem as the Cavision: 2mm filter holders. Are your filters 2mm? Tiffen's are 4mm. And none rotate.

However, nice price!

[Gary Williams]

http://www.cinetactics.com/Page.bok?template=c_mb125h
I use this when I am in the backcounty as it folds down very small and fits nicely in my backpack for what it is it works great and I have no complaints, it does take a little work putting it on though but for backpacking you just cant beat it. I can barely get into the back country with the equipment I already have so this was a nice plus.

[Michael Maier]

In my opinion, if you need a Mattebox do yourself a favor and buy either Arri, Van Diemen, TLS, Chrosziel, Petroff or even a Vocas or Formatt if you are using it with a handcam type like a GL2, Z1 or HVX200, but aside of those I can’t think of one that it’s worth the trouble. This indiesnap sure isn’t, neither is Cavision in my opinion. The Cinetactics one looks more like something disposable, but I think it’s in a different category. It’s more of a portable solution I guess. They say it can take filters but I can’t imagine how it would have rotating filter trays. If it’s not rotating then it's kind pointless. It's probably more a sun shade than a real mattebox. That’s the problem today, any black square around the front barrel gets to be called a mattebox.

[Tim Le]

The indiesnap is basically a $10 Cokin 'P' filter holder attached to probably $50 worth of riveted sheet metal and it's sold for $300. And you thought the Chrosziels had bloated prices. At least the high-end stuff actually works like it's suppose to. None of these low-end "matteboxes" have a rotating filter tray and they all leak light around the filter slots--making it, like others said, pretty much pointless. It's kind of funny to have a big shade to block light in front of the lens and then have light leaking right into the filters.

[Gary Williams]

Originally Posted by Michael Maier

In my opinion, if you need a Mattebox do yourself a favor and buy either Arri, Van Diemen, TLS, Chrosziel, Petroff or even a Vocas or Formatt if you are using it with a handcam type like a GL2, Z1 or HVX200, but aside of those I can’t think of one that it’s worth the trouble. This indiesnap sure isn’t, neither is Cavision in my opinion. The Cinetactics one looks more like something disposable, but I think it’s in a different category. It’s more of a portable solution I guess. They say it can take filters but I can’t imagine how it would have rotating filter trays. If it’s not rotating then it's kind pointless. It's probably more a sun shade than a real mattebox. That’s the problem today, any black square around the front barrel gets to be called a mattebox.

your right I use it more as a sun shade and it dose not hold rotating filters but when you are carrying gear and food for 8-10 days and camera equipment, batteries and tripod ect... and you are traveling on foot for 40 miles their is nothing else out their you can use thats better it has its nitch and it fits very well.

[Gary Williams]

Originally Posted by Tim N Le

The indiesnap is basically a $10 Cokin 'P' filter holder attached to probably $50 worth of riveted sheet metal and it's sold for $300. And you thought the Chrosziels had bloated prices. At least the high-end stuff actually works like it's suppose to. None of these low-end "matteboxes" have a rotating filter tray and they all leak light around the filter slots--making it, like others said, pretty much pointless. It's kind of funny to have a big shade to block light in front of the lens and then have light leaking right into the filters.

cintatics can be set up to not leak light the filter options are where you loose but again for what I do the other choices are not an option like I said it has its nitch and fit very well for what it is.

[Tim Brown]

Originally Posted by Tim N Le

None of these low-end "matteboxes" have a rotating filter tray and they all leak light around the filter slots--making it, like others said, pretty much pointless. It's kind of funny to have a big shade to block light in front of the lens and then have light leaking right into the filters.

The Formatt matte box, one of the "cheaper" alternatives, does have a rotating filter stage and received high marks in a recent review on DV.Com. It does not have provisions for blocking light from the sides, but does from the top. At this price point however, a little gaffer's tape does wonders, not to mention saving you about $700. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have an Arri, but the Formatt is functional at this low price point.