Hi all,

after many tries, we finally build our adapter. We are using Maxxwell's Beattie which is moving in small circle on three shafts. Primary lens is Takumar 70-200mm, camcorder is Panasonic GS400. We bulid radio microphone, which is on fishpole. Receiver is connected to camcorder. After many nights without sleeping, we build our steadycam with two arms and three springs. So... Finally we hope we are ready to go to make some shots for our film.

Do you have any ideas, hints or good points from your first real action ?
Anyone want to give us some advice ?

http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p960.jpg

You did VERY good. BRAVO!
For steadicam (another beauty) you will love to use a 35mm (instead of 70-200)
Show us a clip when you have it.

Ah! That's the photo-negative enlarger you posted earlier. I used exactly the same one but in a very different setup. So you use it (not like me) also for rack focusing?
I remember you put the whole camera inside, did it work out?
Yes, the steadycam looks great too. I wonder if it's as heavy as it looks, but I'm sure it isn't. Good work.

wow if that is not a KICKASS homemade steadycam!!!!

LOVE THE RAW STEEL LOOK with rust and all!!! BRAVO!!!

Steel looking of Steady :) - we cuted some steel out and made some bodypaint and added some more springs for better calibration. Do not know exactly weight, but its about 15kg with all components without camera on it.
It uses about 29 ball bearings :)

http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p964.jpg

And as you remember from before... We are using still the cool wildy looking thing (in fact the photo-negative enlarger as you wrote). But I built inside the GG oscilator. I have little problem with Mabuchi motor overheating, after fifteen minutes in movement its really hot...

http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p962.jpg
http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p963.jpg

Hope everything will working fine...

Daves,
Was that an Opemus in its days?
I know is not Krokus (since I have one)

daves: your steady cam is a work of art. 3 ccd with shallow depth on a steady cam . bravo

15kg and smoking a sigaret as if he he forgot he has the steadycam still on him. That's just great...
Too bad this board is called -Alternative Imaging Methods- in stead of -Home Made Gear- or something. I'd like to discuss these things and my own ideas on other equipment as well.

Moderator: Isn't it a good idea to add -and home made gear- to the title of this board?

Dan: I have both Krokus either Opemus, but this one you could see is Axomat4.

http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p982.jpg
http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p978.jpg
http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p979.jpg

We passed first week of making our film. Lots of new experiences... Even if we had prepared 130mm and 70-200mm lens, we finaly used just 58mm lens. But the depth of field is very good:

http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p987.jpg
http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p991.jpg
http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p994.jpg
http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p1007.jpg

But there is some grain visible - Anyone who use Maxxwell or Beattie : Do you have also visible grain ? Which side of GG do you use - Side with GG or side with fresnel ?

http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p1008.jpg

Thanks for sharing the pics with us. They are very good. YOU ARE THERE!!!! BRAVO!!!


But there is some grain visible - Anyone who use Maxxwell or Beattie : Do you have also visible grain ? Which side of GG do you use - Side with GG or side with fresnel ?

Yes, the grain is there at all times. But is up to you to trick the eye (through the speed of movement combined with the shutter speed) and make it look like.... is not there. THINK! and EXPERIMENT!!!! you have it!
......
We use both sides at all times but each side serves a different purpose!!! Right?THINK!!!!!!!!!
Which side does what? Why are both there? Fresnel does what? Matte side does what? Which side do you NEED to photograph?
I could just share what I know/found, but that would not give you any power. (I might be wrong as well)
The right questions will lead you to the right answers (I hope). Than you GAIN power (and I have someone strong to exchange ideas with) "Easy" is the path leading to dullness. "Hard" is sharpness achieved...(my understanding of real help) ....and........ don't make me get the hose!!!!...... (rotf)

Wow... what a help :) Im not rolling on the floor right now, but anyway - I will reach the best I can get from Maxxwell. Believe me ;-)

Another idea which I have is to take Nikon GG, which has condenser implemented and I shoot whole 36x24 without any vignetting, and rid of the matte side, make it smooth and then make make grit much smaller than in original... I should reduce grain and I thing - get better results than with beattie. Just idea... time will show...

Thanks for sharing the pics with us. They are very good. YOU ARE THERE!!!! BRAVO!!!


Yes, the grain is there at all times. But is up to you to trick the eye (through the speed of movement combined with the shutter speed) and make it look like.... is not there. THINK! and EXPERIMENT!!!! you have it!
......
We use both sides at all times but each side serves a different purpose!!! Right?THINK!!!!!!!!!
Which side does what? Why are both there? Fresnel does what? Matte side does what? Which side do you NEED to photograph?
I could just share what I know/found, but that would not give you any power. (I might be wrong as well)
The right questions will lead you to the right answers (I hope). Than you GAIN power (and I have someone strong to exchange ideas with) "Easy" is the path leading to dullness. "Hard" is sharpness achieved...(my understanding of real help) ....and........ don't make me get the hose!!!!...... (rotf)

I will reach the best I can get from Maxxwell. Believe me ;-)

That's the spirit!!!!!!!! BRAVO AGAIN!

and rid of the matte side, make it smooth and then make make grit much smaller than in original...

Been there/done that (July 2004). Good luck!... and do not take my sense of humor too seriously, please. I mean no harm and no offense, just joking...

and do not take my sense of humor too seriously, please. I mean no harm and no offense, just joking...

Thats ok, I'm not so long at forum, but I know you and your humour :) If you do not read me, that does not mean I do not read you...

But in the other hand, I do not mess around... Im sharing all my free time to lots of hobbies. Im building replica of rally car S130RS
http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p564.jpg,
http://web.datriware.com/gfx_photos/articles/p377.jpg,
Im trying whatever Im thinking about
http://web.datriware.com/files/rapidtest.wmv...
so if you give me that answer, I just want to kill that man :-D But I understand you, you are right, because if I do it by myself, Im the one who did it :)

I decide not to use 58mm lens. I tested it with Takumar 70-200mm and I found the 58mm lens are projecting very small picture on GG, that means more vignetting. If I use Takumar 70-200mm, Im getting twice bigger projected picture. Also for vignetting is better to focus on infinity and then focus by moving lens closer and further to GG. Thats results from my testing. Hope usefull for you...

I have had the same experience with different lenses. 28mm gives a smaler image, 50mm gives a bigger image, but some vignetting and 135mm gives a perfect image, 80-200 zoom gives some vignetting and more light loss.
Anyone know what causes this? Is it the diameter of the lenses?

Is it the diameter of the lenses?
Yes, IF you relate it to max IRIS! The wider the max aperture,(like 1.4) the better (for any focal).
1)Zoom (on camcorder), 2)distance to GG, 3)focal of the lens and4) max aperture. They all work together and gang up on us to ruin da picthshaaa.... g damit ;-)<

No one seem to have noticed the video of the rally car, that is some job in stabilizing. I'm sure it wasn't shot with the 35mm adapter. (on the other hand, you'll get some extra oscillating for free)

Here here!!! A hell of a job. Not only the stabilization (which is indeed outstanding !!!!!!)but the whole clip. Very, very nice! Bravo again! A very nice and creative spot!
How did I ever miss to post on that? (age?.....)

Isn't it the size of the back lens that give you the light spread and larger image?

Howdy from Texas,

<< Moderator: Isn't it a good idea to add -and home made gear- to the title of this board? >>

Well as far as home-made stabilizers are concerned, Charles King has a great site and an excellent message board covering these projects already, and I don't want to compete with him. He's doing it right. Check out his deal at http://www.hbsboard.com/

That's a great site, and new to me, so thanks.
I didn't only mean home-made stabilizers, I just thought this is the place where you can find people to discuss home-made stuff with, but the borders of 'alternative imaging' are a bit tight.

Dave Spi,

those are great images from the car. I have built a few car mounts myself, but you really seem to have some interesting places to put the camera! Do you have some pics of the car rigs?

I found the 58mm lens are projecting very small picture on GG, that means more vignetting. If I use Takumar 70-200mm, Im getting twice bigger projected picture. Also for vignetting is better to focus on infinity and then focus by moving lens closer and further to GG. Thats results from my testing. Hope usefull for you...

28mm gives a smaler image, 50mm gives a bigger image, but some vignetting [snip] Anyone know what causes this? Is it the diameter of the lenses?


Your mistake is in thinking that the focal length of the lens is the issue. Really it is the ratio of focal length to aperture. For example, an 85mm F2.0 works great. A 50mm F2.0 works pretty well too. But a 24mm F2.0 can demonstrate lots of vignetting depending on your system.

Look at the ratios of focal length to aperture:

85mm/F2.0: 42.5:1
50mm/F2.0: 25:1
24mm/F2.0: 12:1

The issue is not that it is a 58mm lens, Dave. It is that it is a 58mm lens with, I would bet, not a very big aperture.

Here here!!! A hell of a job. Not only the stabilization (which is indeed outstanding !!!!!!)but the whole clip. Very, very nice! Bravo again! A very nice and creative spot!
How did I ever miss to post on that? (age?.....)

Thanks, make me happy and smiling :)

Ok guys... just very short clip shooted from DOF with 58mm lens placed on SteadyCam which is running...

http://test.datriware.com/steady.avi
Its bad take... should not finish on the girl there...

http://test.datriware.com/steady2.avi
Another bad take from testing - unstable, unfocused and dirty...

http://test.datriware.com/steady3.avi
DOF in move...

Remember, it was our first day of testing ever :) First day of wearing steady with DOF, no practice...

Do not have anything more yet, no time :(

Dave,

Are you sure your GG is set to the exact registration length for your front lens? It looks to me as if you are out of focus by a millimeter or so. It will make a big difference. Do you have a means to adjust it?

Are you sure your GG is set to the exact registration length for your front lens?

Im sure it was, but we did not pay attention to focus lens...

http://test.datriware.com/testmatnice.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/testmatnice2.jpg

This shots are from very poor light... First part is under two 11W fluor tubes, second part is taken at 8pm in rainy weather. But, look on the second part and tell me what do you think - not focused or low resolution ?

http://web.datriware.com/files/240_dof.avi

Note the circles made by Maxwell GG. They are visible just from one side (side with fresnel).

I still think it's a little bit out of focus. That's a good thing, because if you are pleased now and it is out of focus, you will be really pleased when you get it dialled in!

I had a friend help me set mine up. He sold me and even gave me some of his leftover parts from when he built his first static adapter. I will see if I can get him to post on here how to do it right.

Ok guys,

here is another set of tests... Today I've tested NIKON focusing screen from 36mm camera against MAXWELL beattie... (In other words, I have tested $10 against $150 value). I've recorded all onto tape and then made screenshots, so its in full 720x576. First link is beattie, second is nikon. Just look and decide...

Testing screen:
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/max_obrazec.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/hus_obrazec.jpg

Motorcycle:
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/max_fichtl.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/hus_fichtl.jpg

Some green trees:
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/max_priroda.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/hus_priroda.jpg

Some green trees with changed focus:
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/max_priroda2.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/hus_priroda2.jpg

Wire fence inside trees:
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/max_dratenka.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/hus_dratenka.jpg

Sun through trees:
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/max_obloha.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/hus_obloha.jpg

Label of beer:
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/max_krusovice.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/!testy/hus_krusovice.jpg

---

And now some static shots vs motion...

http://test.datriware.com/sm.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/mm.jpg

and

http://test.datriware.com/sm2.jpg
http://test.datriware.com/mm2.jpg

---

Linear movement is good, but sometimes you can see two points on each side of movement. So movement where GG never stop is better. With Nikon GG you can go 3mm eccentric without any problems... With beattie never, but we tested 0.2mm and its fine.

Too tired today... see ya

hmmm......these pictures seem rather familiar.....hmmmm .... where did I see something like that before?....... you are there! Bravo.
Are you happy with the image? Is there anything better that you can think of? (now, after seeing IT first hand?)

Are you asking in fact how come Beattie is still in business while Nikon makes focusing screens? hmmm......(-ovarB).

Are you happy with the image? Is there anything better that you can think of? (now, after seeing IT first hand?)

I'm never happy with what I gain, because everytime there is something, what can be better ;-)

Now, after seeing this I´m thinking of your words: "The image captured from GG is so good, as the primary lens are..." - Do I have to make another test with my $30 Takumar 70-200mm against some $500 Zeiss ?! ... :-)

Another issue is the oscilating GG. Our 3rd version produced the images I posted previously. But... Have some disadvantages. We are thinking about combine our 2nd with 3rd together :) Maybe we need someone to kick us the right way... Kick us :-)

Are you asking in fact how come Beattie is still in business while Nikon makes focusing screens? hmmm......(-ovarB).

I'm not asking anything... I just tried to show to everyone the difference between maxwell and nikon ($150 and $10) - if any. Or in other hand, I showed, that $10 focusing screen can produce good image. Color abberation is caused by condenser, which is terrible (Used in photo enlarger).

Were did you put the condenser, because I don't have color aberration with probably the same one.
I put the condenser between the adapter lens (your Takumar) and the GG (close to the GG)
I really don't have any visible side effects that way captured on a +/- 1080 x 720 image.

Were did you put the condenser, because I don't have color aberration with probably the same one.
I put the condenser between the adapter lens (your Takumar) and the GG (close to the GG)
I really don't have any visible side effects that way captured on a +/- 1080 x 720 image.

If you take a look at my previous photos with this condenser, you will find just some small abberation... In this tests I did everything in hurry, because I have to change system for 10 test shots, which means 20 times everything decompose and compose again. Condenser was placed in some position fixed by adhesive tape :( Not optimal, but enough to me...
but
I have primary lens -> focusing screen -> condenser -> DV camera... Because Nikon focusing screen has already one condenser built in. Looks like this (|, one side is GG. So I'm using next one between GG and DV. And I get zero vignetting on full 36mm. Better than with beattie :/

Anyway... Nikon GG with condenser is not the way I will follow... not this time...

I agree that even a $10 screen (when you find it for this price) can produce a good result. As for the difference, keep experimenting.(and stop using that condenser or whatever you use now. You do not need it!)

Now: how do you see using a GG (of any kind) vs a focusing screen?
What is the diff? is it any brighter?

Now: how do you see using a GG (of any kind) vs a focusing screen?
What is the diff? is it any brighter?

Damn, you know it is !!! lol , With beattie you can make shoots even in night :) Ok, not really but it has very bright image, with other focusing screens you are out of job.

I just wanted to show resolution test of Nikon Focusing screen vs Maxwell beattie, because people are thinking the beattie has low resolution. So, maybe it has, but its the same as Nikon focusing screen (without any fresnel) - as far as I have tested.

So, we are going to use maxwell (which we are already using for past month - although standard focusing screens are not bad). I wanted to show, that not just the beattie or maxwell is the only one way, but even with standard focusing screen you can take full 36x24 without vignetting... And maybe if I've been knew this before I bought maxwell, maybe I stayed with it... Who knows...

Passed...

As we tested, moving maxwell is much better then static. The only problem is, you have to find some mechanism to oscilate it. This is problem, which lots of people can not solve by themselves at home, I guess. With 0.5mm oscilating movement you have to be very precise. And... we did not find the way to build it home, yet. We have two types of oscilating mechanism right now. One is based on three shafts, second is based on sliders from caddy CD drive. In our minds we have third type, which is based on rotating ring inside of three rollers. But... What we do, is just wasting our time and money, while moving very slowly ahead. We know its the hard way we have to pass, but hope for someones kick :)

With beattie you can make shoots even in night :) Ok, not really but it has very bright image,
Not really? Let me doubt it...
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album05/IMGA0159
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album05/IMGA0164

As we tested, moving maxwell is much better then static. The only problem is, you have to find some mechanism to oscilate it
Oh yeah... THAT! seems to be the "key" to a bright image...
But... What we do, is just wasting our time and money, while moving very slowly ahead, but hope for someones kick
Kick:
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/albums/album06/kick.wmv

Not really? Let me doubt it...
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album05/IMGA0159
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album05/IMGA0164

Dan, not tested yet, do not matter to me now, but wow... I tried a lot (shots at 8pm with the rain) but I did not risk the night shot... Must test it... (lol)

Kick:
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/albums/album06/kick.wmv

Thank you so much... Good kick for us. We have to think about it. You are the god, as my friend said. Thank you again for the video... but... I do not like video in video anymore (rotf)... very nice

You are the god
Do not say that! Seriously! Do not say "perfect" either. Look what hapened to Titanic! "Un-sinckable... perfect, a marvel of ...(human stupid pride)" and all that...... Good motivation (motivator), is OK.

Dan,

With the focusing screen, I am severly impressed with the low light capabilities! It is amazing the stuff you are pulling out. What is the size of the screen that most people use - and how much of it is the camera actually seeing?

Also, cheap focusing screens under $10?!?!? I would have never thunk it - got a source?

Leo, it has been there for 6 months (so far) and so is the rest of the stuff. All you have to do is look and think! That's all. I do not have a "source" at that price. Goggle!

Good motivation (motivator), is OK.
yeah... you are ! We never thought about plastic gears... ;-)

Oscar, Dan : This condenser Im using together with Nikon FS : http://test.datriware.com/con.jpg, Maxwell Im using as is (primary lens, maxwell, DVcamera). Once again - Maxwell is the way I will go...

Maxwell is the way I will go...
Amin......
(and "loose" that "rock" .... so you can run even faster........)

Dan, et al,

(stop me if this question is off topic or a distraction here)

What's your opinion of the static design, or should I say, specifically the image quality of the G35 stuff? I actually met with the G35 designer/owner the other day and the images I saw live through a DVX100 "appeared" to be VERY impressive, and matched what he's posted so far. Just wondering, thanks.

~Shawn

No, is not off topic.
I have a few tests (pics in hi rz) on my site about ststic and in motion GG, brightness comparison and so on. I honestly did not need them and I did not post them there for me. Right? I also made some sugestions for those who want to achieve the best static (see recent wax developments/results thread)
I saw all the pics/clips posted on G35 and micro 35. (I have quite a few myself)
I do however, what I think is best (IMHO) for a film print out.
BTW. My "route" choosing the moving Fresnel was not an accident or one of many options. It was the only logical option (IMO). That other solutions work well, that is true, but there are some limitations (one way or another) that one must be aware of and live with. Well.... I do not like limitations....
What more can I add?

Thanks Dan,

What explicitly do you feel are the limitations or tradeoffs with the static design? (or, please point me to the post where perhaps you already articulated this).

As I don't know specifically what design/technology/approach is inside the G35, I'd like to be able to measure or quantify the static design concerns you speak of to see if they apply here. I'm making an assumption that with the limitations you're referring to, you feel they are inherent and applicable to all static designs?

Thanks!

I do not know either the specific design of G35. If the end result (HD tape? DVD?) can be displayed on a big screen (27"-50") and; while shooting a sharp CU with some lights (soft) in the BG, try and pan/tilt just a bit (hardly moving the camera) and look for grain/pattern. If it shows (on the soft lights in the BG) well.... then you know. If it doesn't is good. BTW, the lights should be a bit underexposed. (obviously if they bloom, not much to see) camera lens 1.4/50 and focus set at close, lights in the BG 20-60 ft away...
Static :
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album05/IMGA0163
Motion:
http://dandiaconu.com/gallery/album05/IMGA0164

(well...you get the idea) (The "grain" from the motion pic, may be grain or noise; the still was taken with a 28-200 lens at 5.6 aperture, that being the max aperture on that lens... back then in Jan or so)

On a general note, if one that makes this contraptions does not "look for trouble" somebody else will and than is worse.(just my POV)
Bottom line is what one is prepared to put up with and pay for...... (I guess)

incorrect links.

Thank you... try them now.

perfect, thank you.

Its just wednesday and I can not wait anymore to see the weekend... Im full o ideas, we are preparing brand new oscilating mechanism (based on someONEs kick ;-)) I have to try the night shot too... Never thought it can be done !

Dan: how did you make the screen on beattie from corner to corner ? I've tried set up camera closer and farther, I found the longer distance the better image is. But If I zoom on it, its getting worse again. If I get everything right, you are using just primary lens, GG (beattie) and camera. No macros, no condensers...

About the G35 i have not seen any quality footage or screenshot. So I do not know either. But micro35 seems soft to me...