HI!

I'm a wildlife cameraman and im currently working in two projects with RED One camera. we use Nikon lenses (80-200, 300 and 500mm) and shoot in 4K,3K and 2K when high speed is needed. When we`re working with long lenses we´re facing a problem of wooble effect in the image.it starts when the heat of the atmosphere goes up, but i think that 18ºC and 10.00 AM its not so hot! First of all we think that it would be heat shimmer, but we didnt have had this issue so strong working with Super 16mm film cameras in the past and in midday hours, so I think it has to be because the rolling shutter and the CMOS of the RED camera, but I was shooting on a sturdy tripod with no wind...What do you think?

If RED is so sensitive to the heat shimmer, its going to be a problem for us to work in a lot of circumstances and distances to the subject. On the other hand the camera is great but we´re surprised and worried about this wooble...

I know that some of you have worked with this camera in wild conditions in africa, alaska, finland...etc. Did you have this problem? any solutions?

Thank you very much in advance!

A.Saiz

Heat shimmer I would say would only be an optical effect and it should not make any difference what camera/sensor you have, just the lens magnification you have.

If you're just comparing it to Super 16 that may be the problem as video images are much more steady and also sharper looking so that any movement tends to show up more. Film has a gentle movement of its own introduced by the moving mechanisms. This is why we need to be using bigger tripods for HD than we did with Super 16, together with the fact that we're viewing on bigger screens.

I'd be surprised if the RED had any more problem with this than any other video camera - but I'm not speaking from first hand experience.

Good luck.

Steve

I agree with Steve and also think it has nothing to do with the camera. I notice the same issue when using my Sony PMW EX3 later in the day when it becomes warmer.
Cheers,
Ofer

Yes, this issue is not about the camera. Instead, this has to do with temperature differences which imply the electromagnetic/optical properties of air are not homogeneous, but instead the properties change between the camera and the object. As a result light rays bend. Typically this appears in the spring time or on hot summer days when the sun shines and warms locally say some dark spot --such as a paved road-- or if there's a cold spot between, say such as a frozen lake or lake with cold water. Once wittnessed that a pine appeared like rubber when it wobbled in the screen. Have coupled times noticed that my car radio has lost proper signal under similar conditions. Obviously, when shooting the effect is the stronger the longer lens one uses.

Hope this helps.

Yes, I'd definitely agree with the notion that heat-generated air waves are the culprit.

This is especially true when using 300-1000mm lenses. The stronger the magnification the bigger the problem becomes. For example when filming the same subject using a 300mm and 600mm Nikkor on a Canon XL body, the 600mm footage will generally have less contrast and more obvious flowing air 'wave' patterns (it should be noted that all XL camcorders multiply by a factor of 7-8 when using Nikkors, so produce far more pronounced problems with 'shimmering' than when using the Red).

The obvious solution is to either get closer to the subject and use a less-extreme telephoto lens, or simply to film during early morning before the sun has too much affect on the low laying blankets of air.

Another option is to film at higher altitude and to avoid low level areas during warm weather.

But sometimes there is no other option than to use the longest super-telephoto lens during the warmest part of a summer day just to obtain that once-in-a-lifetime section of footage.
In this scenario I've often found that by tweaking the video edited footage in-post by lowering brightness slightly and upping both colour and contrast it can help tone down the 'wave' problem enough to save some clips.

I think it's obvious that Alberto is aware that it's the heat shimmer that's responsible, it's just that he's noticing it much more on the RED than the Super 16 cameras he's used to. That's what the query really referred to.
Steve

It all depends on the magnifications and the actual lenses used during those conditions as almost all video cameras SD or HD would show very similar results, including the Red. The 16mm or 35mm film footage would still show the same results with 'shimmer', although as Steve indicated, it would produce a less enhanced 'look' due to the difference between moving film emulsion and the CMOS of the Red.

However, if these conditions are ONLY enhanced when using the Red (when compared to other digital video cameras) I'd be very interested to know why and what causes it.

Thank you all for the quick answers. As Steve says we also think it has to be a heat issue and also I noticed it working with other HD cameras, like the JVC HD200 and its 7x magnification. What surprised us is the high sensitivity of RED in this situations, so I was wondering how many of you suffer this problem working with RED and telephotos lenses, and what solutions do you think could minimize this effect. Any experiences are welcome as we're facing a challenge shooting in a lot of situations if this issue is so common. I will tell you if i find something. Thanks a lot!

The longer the lens focal length and the higher the resolution, the more pronounced this effect is, and it can occur even at seemingly mild temperatures. The only relevance as far as RED is concerned is the high resolution of its image, which makes the shimmering effect that much more apparent.

Good evening,

I agree with most everything said her.

However!!! It really is not as much heat as it is intense just light waves!! I get this shooting in all types of cold temperatures with light refracting off of snow as an example. certainly in mild weather heat does seem to be the culprit, but i see it in as cold as -20 degrees on a sunny morning. Also just using the standard 20x lens zoomed in is enough to enhance the problem!!! with my larger lenses it is even more pronounced.


If anyone has a suggestion that will work, other than overcast day filming only, I am all ears and would love to hear it!!!!

but i see it in as cold as -20 degrees on a sunny morning.

Yes, same here, and that's the point. It's not the absolute temperature value, but instead the variation of temperature (and the region of warmer air moving upwards) between the lens and the target.

I haven't noticed any special effect with Red One. But, as Chris says higher resolution and perhaps also shorter depth of focus attract the eye more easily.

A perfect example of seeing this through nothing but optics and your own eye... put the strongest eyepiece you have on a telescope and aim it at a the furthest street sign you can see. With the right equipment, you might be able to get a sign half a mile away from you seem as if it were only about 20 feet away, maybe less. But when you magnify to that intensity, the light that is available that comes from that object from that distance is going to come across some obstacles, as well as be much more dispersed from its point of origin than it would be if you were actually standing 20 feet away from it.

Hi Alberto,
Are you seeing any difference on the long shots you are talking about when you make a pan? I have heard that long shots can be effected by the skew issue with the cmos sensors when panning. Not sure if this is relevant, but i am certainly curious to know if it is an issue.
Thanks,
Bryce

shooting on a sturdy tripod with no wind...

Guess what's holding that very high definition camera and it's humungous lens to that sturdy tripod?

At best, 2 X 3/8" S & W, in - line screws. At worst? 1 X 1/4" S & W screw.

The chance that either of these fixings will prevent the camera wobbling back and forth with the slightest provocation is about 3 zillion to 1.

At that resolution and those lens lengths, it doesn't take much.

Much as I believe the majority of what you're seeing is simple diffraction due to air temperature differentials, I wouldn't rule out the tripod fixing as a possible culprit for part of it.

If physically strapping the camera down to the head plate doesn't make any difference, I'll be suprised, as I get this wobble with my Canon XH A1 all the time @ 20X zoom (when it isn't strapped), and it sure as hell ain't diffraction (well, it wouldn't be when the air speed is approaching 30 knots).


CS

Guess what's holding that very high definition camera and it's humungous lens to that sturdy tripod?

At best, 2 X 3/8" S & W, in - line screws. At worst? 1 X 1/4" S & W screw.

The chance that either of these fixings will prevent the camera wobbling back and forth with the slightest provocation is about 3 zillion to 1.

At that resolution and those lens lengths, it doesn't take much.

Much as I believe the majority of what you're seeing is simple diffraction due to air temperature differentials, I wouldn't rule out the tripod fixing as a possible culprit for part of it.

If physically strapping the camera down to the head plate doesn't make any difference, I'll be suprised, as I get this wobble with my Canon XH A1 all the time @ 20X zoom (when it isn't strapped), and it sure as hell ain't diffraction (well, it wouldn't be when the air speed is approaching 30 knots).


CS

Shouldn't be a problem with a decent tripod though. If you use a crappy little Manfrotto or similar then yes, but get into the realms of serious kit like O'Connor 2060 or 2575, Ronford Baker Atlas 30 or the heavy Sachtlers and it should be rock steady, even when panning and tilting.
Steve

that just ain't so.

My Vinten FiberTecs are the equivalent of bolting the head to a block of concrete.

The sticks are good, the head is good, it's that damn 1/4" S&W screw which lets the entire setup down.

The only way to stop my XH A1 from rocking back and forth sideways in a breeze is to physically strap it down to the head using, er, straps.

The underside of the camera is covered with this mushy rubber stuff, the 1/4" screw was never designed to prevent sideways wobble (not a big call for it with still photography, where it came from) and the result is a complete load of bollocks as soon as the breeze gets over 10 knots.

Untill someone gets there heads around introducing a universal 4 point fixing system which absolutely prevents the camera from being able to wobble, it will.

Having 10 grand of camera sitting on 10 grand of camera support, with the two joined by one poxy 1/4", 25 cent screw is absolutely beyond belief with High Definition.


CS

but that ain't so! Maybe it's because your camera's so light, but certainly I don't have any sort of wobble relating to the screws on my gear. I use fairly beefy rigs like HDCam and Varicam with long lenses on an O'Connor 2060 on Sachtler heavy duty legs and I can assure the mounting is solid as a rock. Admittedly it uses 2 beefy 3/8" screws, but I have used 1/4" and it makes no difference. The screws are not taking any pressure, that's the plate, and as long as that's nice and strong the screws are irrelevant.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one I think.
I do agree about the rubber bits on the plates though, and I have removed them in the past when I used a Sachtler Studio II as they seemed as though they could only cause problems, why not just have 2 bits of metal pressed directly together instead of soft rubber!? It's to stop sideways twisting of the camera on the plate of course for those cameras that only have 1 mounting hole, but most pro gear allows several screws to be used so the rubber bit is not needed.
Steve

All Blacks - Wales no score draw, then!

Hard to believe, but miracles do, now and then, happen.

Nah, bollocks, we dished youse, simple as that.


I jest, of course.

Steve, work with me on this.

I'm seriously trying to get both the camera manufacturers and the support people to agree there needs to be a new attachment worked out that gets away from the single 1/4" or dual 3/8" screws.

This is really a major problem. You may not have seen it, but I have, and it's only going to get worse as HD works through the community.

That 1/4" screw fixing worked (and works) well for still camera operators as their cameras are a damn sight wider than they are longer (at least where they touch the tripod head).

A video camera is long and thin and thus has very little sideways purchase on the head, and very little "outrigger" ability to resist a sideways wobble.

My point is that:

a) This camera profile isn't going to change any time soon.

b) It really doesn't work all that well.

c) It wouldn't cost the Earth to come up with a 4 point fixing that would put both existing attachment systems out of their misery.

d) For HD there really isn't another solution.

Still, if you think the existing system is perfect, so be it.

I don't, and am trying to change it, and have the ear of one of the majors in this, and may, just, be getting traction.

It's either on the cart or not, I guess.


CS

I think if you're talking about little handycams and even EX1/3 type cameras then yes you do have a big point. Not only is the single 1/4" screw not enough the bases themselves are so plasticky and weak that they do bend and flex.
With pro cams though I think it's a different matter. With Sony and Panasonic broadcast cams once you get rid of the stupid quick release plate that wobbles all over the place, the base of the camera is pretty robust. It's then just a case of getting a proper baseplate on there (Ronford Baker make an SAP and PAP plate for Sony and Panny repsectively that is excellent, or you can get one machined for yourself). Typcially these plates have 3/4" and 1/4" holes all the way along the base so that depending on what type of head and mounting plate you have you can have 2, 3 or even more 3/8" screws holding it on.
Same goes for the RED cameras (as Alberto has), and Phantom HD, plus film cameras etc., all have good strong mounting options. Once you have this I don't think the screw size or amount of them makes any difference.
Steve
ps I'm not Welsh, I just live here - and can't stand or understand rugby!

For all my long lens camera work with Nikkors I prefer to use the actual Lens Tripod Mount rather than the video camera tripod attachment screw. This balances the the kit far better, and it also allows you the option to attach the camera body to a second tripod or via a longer 'stepped' tripod mount plate with double-fitting when on a single tripod.
I mainly use Canon XL bodies with heavy-duty tripod plates, but the same system can be used with the Red when using lenses that have lens tripod mounts.

The problem is that a lot of lenses have crap flimsy tripod mounts, but most of the hefty super-telephoto ED Nikkors have very solid tripod mounts and with the added advantage of some heavy duty plates that have numerous mounting screw holes it allows you to really fix the set-up nicely to prevent flexing or wobble.

However, even with these setups there can be some very slight flex in some areas, especially in the lens bayonet mount and lens adapter bayonet fitting.

I very rarely pan with such setups and whenever I'm filming static subjects or fixed points (such as a bird at the nest or animal near den entrance etc, filmed at extreme distance and normal hide work) I much prefer to lock the camera/tripod setup down, place extra beanbags on the lens or an extra weighted bag hanging from the tripod hook, and then control the camera functions via a remote control device.

Good evening,



Using the bigger lenses requires a rail of some sort.

the tripod plate should be double screwed to the camera if possible.


Using a canon quick mount to the rear and a locking mount from the lens foot to the rail will help stabiliztion big time, however heavy winds will require added weight and heat/light distortion can't be stopped as far as I know.

keeping camera low to ground if possible, a portable windbreak, image stabilization and getting closer will all help in this regard.


I wish there was an easy solution, regardless of the type of camera you use!!

There is a good DV-thread here covering the Ronsrail and other types of rails and supports for long lenses:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/under-water-over-land/138512-sigma-zooms.html