Letus35 Extreme or Ultimate at DVinfo.net

Paul Inglis · December 8th, 2008, 10:55 AM

Having recently purchased a Sony PMW-EX3 I am seriously looking at the Letus35 Extreme or Ultimate. I do have a standard adaptor to fit my range of Nikon’s to the EX Mount but I am certain that the quality will be vastly improved using a Letus adaptor.

However, will I see any significant difference between the Extreme and the Ultimate, other than the considerably lightness of my wallet?

If anyone is using either of the Letus adaptors I’d be grateful for you opinion.

Happy shooting,

Paul

Chris Barcellos · December 8th, 2008, 02:52 PM

Hey Paul:

I am curious about this too, but I think one big difference is that Ultimate may have spinning ground glass, rather than vibrating. My guess is that with the new cmos camera's, Letus has seen some issues with compatibility with rolling shutter effects, and the vibrating type adapters. I have fooled with my little HV20 which is cmos and noticed that it is fairly easy to induce a jello/wobble effect in the image depending on shutter speed, and vibration frequency.

Bob Hart · December 8th, 2008, 10:36 PM

Chris.

Around aircraft and using an EX1/Letus Extreme, I found choosing the "shutter-off" option worked best for me. Beyond the normal artifacts to be expected with hostile lighting and lens settings, I did not observe anything different.

In those circumstances, say f6.3 with a zoom I use for aircraft, where a "just-emerging" grain pattern exists, I observe that the codec seems to toss detail away before "rolling shutter" sticks its head up. I am not a gymnast when it comes to camera movements so I am likely not pushing the limits.

When focussed on a Siemens star with the star centred in one half of frame, slowly pan and stop a few times and watch the sharpness melt away during the moves as the codec plays its game. This effect does not appear to be amplified by the camera looking through a groundless.

I have become conditioned to avoid savage moves because of the limitations of converting interlace to progressive with Z1 footage and previously using a film camera long ago.

Slightly off-topic, the "ringing" artifact associated with too high a detail setting on some cameras, I actually observed with film from an old Bolex H16 with a 22mm lens, when slowly panning across shiny rail lines to another rail line, crossing by an overpass bridge.

December 8th, 2008, 10:55 AM	#1
Paul Inglis Major Player Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: British Isles Posts: 415	Letus35 Extreme or Ultimate Having recently purchased a Sony PMW-EX3 I am seriously looking at the Letus35 Extreme or Ultimate. I do have a standard adaptor to fit my range of Nikon’s to the EX Mount but I am certain that the quality will be vastly improved using a Letus adaptor. However, will I see any significant difference between the Extreme and the Ultimate, other than the considerably lightness of my wallet? If anyone is using either of the Letus adaptors I’d be grateful for you opinion. Happy shooting, Paul

December 8th, 2008, 02:52 PM	#2
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	Hey Paul: I am curious about this too, but I think one big difference is that Ultimate may have spinning ground glass, rather than vibrating. My guess is that with the new cmos camera's, Letus has seen some issues with compatibility with rolling shutter effects, and the vibrating type adapters. I have fooled with my little HV20 which is cmos and noticed that it is fairly easy to induce a jello/wobble effect in the image depending on shutter speed, and vibration frequency. __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

December 8th, 2008, 10:36 PM	#3
Bob Hart Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: PERTH. W.A. AUSTRALIA. Posts: 4,476	Chris. Around aircraft and using an EX1/Letus Extreme, I found choosing the "shutter-off" option worked best for me. Beyond the normal artifacts to be expected with hostile lighting and lens settings, I did not observe anything different. In those circumstances, say f6.3 with a zoom I use for aircraft, where a "just-emerging" grain pattern exists, I observe that the codec seems to toss detail away before "rolling shutter" sticks its head up. I am not a gymnast when it comes to camera movements so I am likely not pushing the limits. When focussed on a Siemens star with the star centred in one half of frame, slowly pan and stop a few times and watch the sharpness melt away during the moves as the codec plays its game. This effect does not appear to be amplified by the camera looking through a groundless. I have become conditioned to avoid savage moves because of the limitations of converting interlace to progressive with Z1 footage and previously using a film camera long ago. Slightly off-topic, the "ringing" artifact associated with too high a detail setting on some cameras, I actually observed with film from an old Bolex H16 with a 22mm lens, when slowly panning across shiny rail lines to another rail line, crossing by an overpass bridge.