|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 17th, 2004, 10:26 PM | #1 |
New Boot
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: new york, ny
Posts: 5
|
mini pro 35 for sale
mini 35 for sale. its the 300 series. in great shape. comes with the XL1, XL1S, XL2 setup and PL mount. this will only work with the XL1, XL1S or the XL2 when it comes out. this will not work with the DVX100.
$7000.00 or best offer. thanks for looking. you can contact me at shaun@oneeye.net |
August 18th, 2004, 02:20 AM | #2 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 121
|
Is this the Pro 35 or the Mini 35?
__________________
http://www.IndieRentals.com RED Rentals, Camera, Grip, Lighting, Sound, Post and More. http://www.madmojo.com Production blog. |
August 18th, 2004, 07:21 AM | #3 |
New Boot
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: new york, ny
Posts: 5
|
MINI 35
|
March 23rd, 2005, 01:19 PM | #4 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: hollywood , ca USA
Posts: 38
|
pro vs mini...
other than price.....
what is the biggest difference in the results between the pro and the mini??? i know that the pro oscillates the glass and the mini spins it, but as far as the final effect and restrictions, why pay so much more for the pro???? what is it doing so much better?? |
March 23rd, 2005, 09:38 PM | #5 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Salt Lake City. Utah
Posts: 68
|
I have shot many projects with each system. The GG in the current Mini oscillates as well. Both units operate on the same technical principle. The mini is designed for use with prosumer/industrial type cameras like the DVX and XL1/2, although the line is beginning to blur as to where prosumer ends and pro starts in regard to cameras, and many pros are using these great little cameras now as part of the toolbox.
The first obvious difference between the two is size, the Mini being designed for smaller cameras, and so is smaller as well. The Pro is larger and incorporates a few extra features The Mini must be configured specifically for the model of camera it is to be used on, while the Pro mounts on the standard b4 used on most professional cameras (SDX900/ Varicam/CineAlta etc). The Mini is powered by a seperate battery, while the Pro draws its power from the camera it is mounted on through the lens cable. The mini does not start and stop with the camera, without a remote cable, while the pro uses the same cable as above. The pro has a secondary aperature that allows you to stop down the amount of light coming through the adapter without stopping down the lens, helping to maintain an open stop on the lens and an exact exposure to the camera. There are no doubt other engineering differences as well. Both units are made to the usual P+S Technik high standard of manufacture. P+S has long been a respected company in the motion picture world. Its not what it's doing better, it's what camera you can use it on. The prices for both units are at about what each market will bear for the specific application. Hope this helps.
__________________
Kindest regards, Jason Brunner jason@aros.net http://www.jasonbrunner.com http://www.fleurpost.net (Thats just, like, my opinion, man) |
June 4th, 2005, 07:56 PM | #6 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
Found this hiding in another thread; split it out so it could stand its own.
|
July 17th, 2005, 11:51 PM | #7 |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 1,427
|
Shooting with a pro 35
Some how I was punged into the role as 1 A.C. on a project that uses the pro 35 adapter and an F900. The DP is a nice person and has won a few awards an will no doubt go on to become famous, the program sponsering is prestigious and as a result the equipment was more or less donated. I just thought I'd post some of my findings and opinions.
::note:: I am NOT a 1st A.C. by trade, typically if I work with HD it's as a utility or an engineer (depending on what the production is geared up to pay) so I'm sure a professional A.C. will have a different opinion from mine. Technically I found that with the camera we used (F900) there is a little bit of lens shading required, I had heard this but did not believe it until I tried it myself, the occilating ground glass will cause a little bit of a horizontel shift which will need to be compensated on an adapter by adapter basis. The adapter does make noise but not nearly as much as I had been told that it did, perhaps we have a new one, or perhaps people just like to find things to complain about. I find that it's about equal to the internal fan (on low) of the f900. Light loss isn't bad at all at least with fast lenses (1.9T) and the P+S adapter's Iris all the way open. We've been shooting in pretty low, tungsten light FOCUSING IS HARD. This is not of course a bad point because all of thouse film look guys want the depth of field, but UNLIKE say a set of Digiprimes when you're on a longer lens your depth of field is EXTREMELY SHALLOW (especially if you're on a low f-stop) and the 5-6 inches you have on a 2/3 inch chip is much smaller (maybe 1/2-1) on a 35mm plane. In the current film i'm working on the f-stop is consistantly at 1.9 no shot is static, and many consist of dolly shots with multiple focus marks. You will need someone will crafted in the art of pulling focus (not me) to have successful focus pulls everytime. In addition, if you're using the pro35 adapter on an HD camera and "video village" is also equipped with an HD monitor, you will be VERY hard pressed to get through a set of takes (especially with actors who may miss ther marks) with out at least one soft focus. Tomorrow steadicam comes in which will be yet another fun development. For the time being I think in lieu of a super experienced A.C. an A.C. with an HD LCD on board monitor might be enough to get a production by. Note an NTSC down convert WILL NOT be good enough to pull focus from (this I know first hand). For those of us coming from a video world, back focus is virtually a non issue, I've checked it maybe 3 times a day and never had to change it, but we are in fairly controlled conditions so individual results (specifically field results) may very. Again I'm not an experienced A.C. and why the D.P. thought I would be a good choice for this position is beyond me (my guess is my surplus of f900 information and thier lack of bank roll) but I think that this is definitely a valuable tool for Film makers transferring to the Digital world. and if someone else were pulling focus I would definitely consider using this device. Last edited by Nick Hiltgen; July 18th, 2005 at 07:17 AM. |
December 28th, 2006, 04:02 PM | #8 |
New Boot
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 10
|
Pro 35
Just curious to what the purchase price of a used Pro 35 might be these days.
Any info is helpful. Thanks, Chip |
December 29th, 2006, 07:46 AM | #9 |
Trustee
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,269
|
I have never seen an used Pro35 for sale before.
|
December 29th, 2006, 09:44 AM | #10 | |
New Boot
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 10
|
Quote:
|
|
December 29th, 2006, 03:57 PM | #11 |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 1,427
|
I'd say a good starting point would be 80% of original sale price (depending on age and condition) and then go lower if no one seems interested.
__________________
I have a dream that one day canon will release a 35mm ef to xl adapter and I'll have iris control and a 35mm dof of all my ef lenses, and it will be awesome... |
December 30th, 2006, 02:59 AM | #12 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 136
|
Quote:
You'd probably want to move it before Red and Silicon become established. |
|
December 30th, 2006, 04:25 PM | #13 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 145
|
please email greg at digitalfx dot tv with asking price.
We are interested in the Pro35.
__________________
www.digitalfx.tv |
| ||||||
|
|