RNG35

Currently other adapter companies charge around $600 for their seperate fipping devices that you can hook up to your adapter. What would it take for you to be attracted to our flip device rather than the other guys? Price?

- cheaper price
- build quality
- light stop

I think that adding a flip device will just add to the price, weight and portability of the unit, at which point the RNG35 will just become another Brevis. The number one benefit the RNG35 has over all of these other adaptors is it's suitability for run-n-gun work and is the primary reason I chose it.

Adding flip devices is not an option for me and I will be modifying all my cameras to induce flipping in-camera, also because I do 100% event work I'm forced to use existing light and the introduction of an optical flipping device would be to it's detriment.

i agree with harry, i never understood why so many people want a flip device. as harry told before it costs money takes light (allthough it should be very little) and adds a lot of weight. moreover you still have to focus on the little (in my case) hv30 screen. i mean i surely would invest the money in an external hd monitor. however you wont get anything for less than 800 bucks (in europe even more). however finally a friend sold me an old mamyia prism (non metered) very cheap (50euro) because he didn't need it anymore. i remember when i searched for it in ebay it was like 150 bucks.
http://cgi.ebay.at/Mamiya-Non-Metered-P ... 638Q2em122

i'm still waiting for my v3 (as you all i guess) but i tried it out on the stock hv30 and it works fine. a lot easier to focus. looks a bit like the focus assistent of the hv30 with a little better resolution. however you are loosing like 2mm on each side of the screen. so to check vignetting f.e. you have to look through the stock viewfinder (or lets say through the hole at the back of the hv30) because with that prism you suddenly have smth like a real viewfinder...
regards

Is it possible the Letus flip or the Brevis flip (or both) provide some optical correction to distortion, edge to edge sharpness, or CA? I thought I had read that somewhere, but I could be mistaken.

I actually use a flip unit with my RNG35 and I have found lately that I don't use it very often because of the ease of use that the RNG35 is already at. Even if I have to correct it in post. Good points guys.

Thank you. If I may pose what I posted more as a question, is there any optical correction provided by using the Letus or Brevis flip?

Apparently there is some slight aberration on the XHA1 in the bare camera itself. The Cinevate flip is supposed to correct this. However, the current RNG35 set up seems to not show much aberrations as noticed in some footage:

http://www.rng35.com/videos/rng35_xha1_002.mov

So here is a quick comparison. the first is the xha1 with a leading adapter. You will be able too see quite a bit of CA in it. The second is with the xha1 with the rng35. A little CA but hardly any. Neither one was using a flipping device.

Leading adapter with XHA1
http://rng35.com/images/ca_other.jpg

RNG35 with XHA1
http://rng35.com/images/ca_rng.jpg

Thank you for clarifying that the CA corrected by the Brevis flip is in the camera, not the adapter.

Can you please speak to the reason the rng35 does not have the same degree of CA as the cited "leading adapter"?

I have the HV30. Can you please discuss this issue with regards to that camera?

Also, can you please discuss the purpose for the long tube length of the rng35? It seems a bit longer than others.


Thank you.

bluesgeek,

Thanks for asking the questions. We need more of them on the forum and I am always happy to discuss them.

Well, in reality it really isn't longer. In the new design, measured against the Brevis it is about the same in length. We have some spacers you can use in case you need more distance from the achromat to the gg. There will always be a minimal distance because it is necessary to be able to get the macro focusing and to zoom in enough on the gg. Then in cases of smaller camcorders, you may need some extra space to clear the ground glass holder so another spacer may be needed. Also in the case of the HV20 and 30, the camera reacts a bit differently with the large achromat. Not sure why.

If you look at some other adapters too you will see how long it actually is from the GG to the achromat. Quite a bit of space.

As far as the CA, I think it is just because we have figured out a good achromat configuration that minimized the CA.

Thank you. Do you think that the Brevis flip is designed to deal with any correction issues inherent in the HV30?

Well, with the flip unit you can zoom in more if you need to. I know the Brevis has fresnel glass for their focusing screens so it helps with vignetting. But there are pros and cons to this.

hi tracey, do you have plans to sell a larger (longer) spacer for smaller camcorders as well or do you think just a second spacer would do the job. i mean lately i read quite often this issue, that the distance is to short to zoom past the vignetting.... however never heard anything about a nice working solution.
fil

Another spacer works nicely. We will try and get a differnt achromat with more macro power eventually for smaller cams. For now just extra spacing is needed.