I've been hearing a lot about how weak some of the aspects of the FS100 is. I have one, and I don't necessarily feel the same way, however, I'd like to know if anybody has evidence, for example that the stock shoe/handle mount is not a strong mounting point, hence the proliferation of 3rd party handles and cages.

I kind of feel the e-Mount isn't necessarily up to putting on full frame zooms, and in a way those big lens are made for full frame cameras, however it's hard to get good APS-C / DX sized glass, mostly the good glass is full frame. However, has anybody yet had their e-mount fail on them? Has anybody had the handle fail or cause damage or distortion of the FS100 frame? Has anybody taken the FS100 apart and examined the chassis to see how strong it really is inside the possibly "thinner than pro" plastic? (which I don't necessarily agree that it's too thin and plasticky.)

On thing I was thinking of just making myself is a metal plate that goes underneath the FS100 and extends to where you might put on an adapter, such as for the Nikon to E or EOS to E. Some of those have 'feet' on them, seems like it might be a good idea to shore up the mount just there to take some of the strain off the e-mount. However... is this a waste of time and space?

I like the fact the FS100 can be kind of small, I don't want to turn it into an unweidy beast unless it's going to fall apart unless I turn it into one.

check out these guys at solid camera. Solid Camera EVF Support Preview on Vimeo Look strong but lots of money.

I've been schlepping my FS100 with fairly tame glass (Nikkor 17-55, Tokina 11-16, kit lens and Samyang 35mm) round Europe since May, with no problems - the build quality has held up better, IMHO, than my EX1s (ask an owner about the dodgy tripod mount, the rub-off paint, the SxS door and so on). I don't use rails unless I need a matte box (outdoors stuff).

There comes a point where, if you're using fast glass, you have to attach the camera to the lens, rather than vice versa. That means rails and lens support. If you're not hanging too much stuff off the camera, you could attach, say, a Canon 80-200 2.8 to the tripod and hang the FS100 off of that, but unlike stills cameras, video cameras tend to move around quite a bit (pan/tilt etc) with attendant physical effects such as momentum, and again that's perhaps where you'd want some rails between camera and lens.

I suppose it comes down to the point that the E-Mount has a lot of electronics in it, that the camera needs an adaptor for most lenses, thus extending the leverage on the E-Mount, and that if you move beyond tame glass and add things like geared follow focus in rough hands, you really should be supporting the lens on the rails.

It's not that the FS100 is inherently fragile, but more that it's not designed to carry cine lenses without assistance. Hence rails and SolidCamera's mount.

IIRC, there was a wonderful shot somewhere on DVinfo.net of a JVC HD100 wearing a DoF adaptor and some pretty huge glass in front of that - and you could SEE the droop.

So Matt

Are you going to use some supports with it, or are you now? For example, the other day I did some tests with my Canon EOS 70-200 f2.8 and and adapter. Of course I used the tripod foot on the adapter to mount it, but I had a lot of camera behind that point, the center of mass is much farther back than when mounting a 5D or 1D this way, and I felt that still there was a bit too much torque on the emount.

So how would you support it? At the adapter tripod foot?

Thanks much.

-Keith

+1 on finding a way of moving the CoG - and then we're back to rails.

I'm not currently using any support for my current crop of lenses. I'm waiting on the MTF and other Canon 'smart' adaptors to signal which 80-200 I'll go for, and for that, I'll use rails to support the camera (so not necessarily using the tripod foot, but we'll see) and lens, then balance that onto the tripod plate.

But could probably 'get away' with a stripped down FS100 on an 80-200 using the foot if the tripod head can take it. The advantage of a light weight body!