Formatt 500 Matte Box at DVinfo.net

Kevin Galliford · August 24th, 2004, 12:11 PM

I Just got my Formatt Matte Box in for my GL2. Its nice. Only thing is a piece of it was cracked :-(. I'll have to send it back to B&H, for an Exchange.

It's very Light, and was very inexpensive. Only thing is I am attaching it directly to the camera lens I dont have a Wide Angle Lense, and the microphone interferes with it a little bit.

but ither than that its great. Makes the camera also look very professional.

Darko Flajpan · August 24th, 2004, 01:16 PM

Sorry, but 300$ idoesn't seem to me "very inexpensive" for a piece of folded alluminium or plastic. I've seen lots of other and much expensive matte boxes and it's a rip-off! Btw, my friend is working in one small manufacture with tin and alluminium. He is also a passionate hobby videographer with DVC80. He made great looking 2 filter holder+matte box and now is working on same for my XM2. He is also considering to make those for $$ not for $$$.

Graham Bernard · August 25th, 2004, 02:31 AM

Darko - have you a picture of the box on the XM2?

Grazie

Darko Flajpan · August 25th, 2004, 12:52 PM

No, not yet, I expect to have matte box in next few days. Price will be few beers, so I am not pushing very hard.I will post some pics this week.

Graham Bernard · August 25th, 2004, 12:57 PM

Koooolll!

Grazie

Joshua Starnes · August 25th, 2004, 01:21 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Darko Flajpan : Sorry, but 300$ idoesn't seem to me "very inexpensive" for a piece of folded alluminium or plastic. I've seen lots of other and much expensive matte boxes and it's a rip-off! Btw, my friend is working in one small manufacture with tin and alluminium. He is also a passionate hobby videographer with DVC80. He made great looking 2 filter holder+matte box and now is working on same for my XM2. He is also considering to make those for $$ not for $$$. -->>>

If you're talking about a good matte box for less than $300, I'd definitely be interested.

Kevin Galliford · August 25th, 2004, 01:50 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00050.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00049.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00048.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00045.jpg

I dont think I like it. may return it. Its way too big for the camera? Just think I can get some better equipment for 299.00. Anyone agree?

Joshua Starnes · August 31st, 2004, 02:58 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Galliford : http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00050.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00049.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00048.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00045.jpg

I dont think I like it. may return it. Its way too big for the camera? Just think I can get some better equipment for 299.00. Anyone agree? -->>>

It seems okay, as long as you never have to put a french flag on it or anything. Have you shot with it yet? Have you used filters with it yet? Do that and then think abou it.

I don't think you're going to get better for $300, at least not until Darko's friend starts making some. Anyone heard from Darko lately?

Boyd Ostroff · August 31st, 2004, 03:34 PM

That looks like a pretty big thing to hang off the lens without any rods to support...

Thomas Smith Jr · September 9th, 2004, 06:07 PM

I just got my Formatt FM-500 and my 58mm ring adapter. First the Formatt website says that the XM2 (They don't list the Gl2 on their website only the xm2 but I knew that they were the same camera) requires a 52mm ring. Which made me wonder seeing as how I am 100% certain that my GL2 has a 58mm thread. The 58mm ring worked fine.

I was pretty dissapointed that there was absolutley no documentation in the box. I nearly destroyed my flag trying to put it on and found I was doing it the wrong way. I know it's fairly simple and I probably wouldn't have read it before I tried installing but a little one-page diagram would have been real nice of them to include.

After succesfully installing it, I realized that this thing WAS NOT designed for the GL2 (I know nobody said it was but they did list the XM2 as "compatible" on their website). The idea of having flat-glass filters is so you can change them ease but when the mattebox is fully installed on to the GL2, a filter can not be added or removed from either stage without completley removing the matte box entirely because of the GL2s built-on microphone.

Also, The 360 degree rotational stage turns in to a 15 degree rotational stage.... because of the built-on microphone.

I really like the way this thing looks on my camera. I mean, if anything, it makes the camera look cool. But I don't think "looking cool" is enough to outweigh all the cons created by it's inate incompatbility with my particular camera. And seeing as how this matte box is like $500-$1000 less then any other cool looking matte box (the cinetactics matteblox looks lame imo) I think this is my only choice in the filter-holder/sunshade/french-flag-waving/cooler-look department.

I also have a question that I am hoping one of you can answer: Why would you have something that is supposed to keep light away from the front lens element have big holes in it that leak light from behind the camera? You can see the one of the fours holes I am speaking of in the picture: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...d/DSC00048.jpg. Am I missing something?

Boyd Ostroff · September 9th, 2004, 06:22 PM

Maybe it has something to do with why those other cool-looking matteboxes cost $500-$1000 more?... ;-)

Rocky Pope · September 14th, 2004, 03:08 PM

Thomas,

I have also heard people inquiring if the GL2's microphone was removable. I understand your dilemma. But from what I've seen here and elsewhere, it isn't removable. :-(

Don't take this as being the last word on the subject. Check around elsewhere, and post back if you find anything.

Regards,

Rocky

August 24th, 2004, 12:11 PM	#1
Kevin Galliford Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: USA Posts: 139	Formatt 500 Matte Box I Just got my Formatt Matte Box in for my GL2. Its nice. Only thing is a piece of it was cracked :-(. I'll have to send it back to B&H, for an Exchange. It's very Light, and was very inexpensive. Only thing is I am attaching it directly to the camera lens I dont have a Wide Angle Lense, and the microphone interferes with it a little bit. but ither than that its great. Makes the camera also look very professional.

August 24th, 2004, 01:16 PM	#2
Darko Flajpan Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Bjelovar, Croatia Posts: 153	Sorry, but 300$ idoesn't seem to me "very inexpensive" for a piece of folded alluminium or plastic. I've seen lots of other and much expensive matte boxes and it's a rip-off! Btw, my friend is working in one small manufacture with tin and alluminium. He is also a passionate hobby videographer with DVC80. He made great looking 2 filter holder+matte box and now is working on same for my XM2. He is also considering to make those for $$ not for $$$. __________________ XM2 Sony DXC637P BetaSP

August 25th, 2004, 12:52 PM	#4
Darko Flajpan Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Bjelovar, Croatia Posts: 153	No, not yet, I expect to have matte box in next few days. Price will be few beers, so I am not pushing very hard.I will post some pics this week. __________________ XM2 Sony DXC637P BetaSP

August 25th, 2004, 01:50 PM	#7
Kevin Galliford Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: USA Posts: 139	Pictures of my Matte Box http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00050.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00049.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00048.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00045.jpg I dont think I like it. may return it. Its way too big for the camera? Just think I can get some better equipment for 299.00. Anyone agree?

August 31st, 2004, 02:58 PM	#8
Joshua Starnes Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 356	Re: Pictures of my Matte Box <<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Galliford : http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00050.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00049.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00048.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/kevingalliford/DSC00045.jpg I dont think I like it. may return it. Its way too big for the camera? Just think I can get some better equipment for 299.00. Anyone agree? -->>> It seems okay, as long as you never have to put a french flag on it or anything. Have you shot with it yet? Have you used filters with it yet? Do that and then think abou it. I don't think you're going to get better for $300, at least not until Darko's friend starts making some. Anyone heard from Darko lately?

August 25th, 2004, 02:31 AM	#3
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	Darko - have you a picture of the box on the XM2? Grazie

August 25th, 2004, 12:57 PM	#5
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	Koooolll! Grazie

August 25th, 2004, 01:21 PM	#6
Joshua Starnes Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 356	<<<-- Originally posted by Darko Flajpan : Sorry, but 300$ idoesn't seem to me "very inexpensive" for a piece of folded alluminium or plastic. I've seen lots of other and much expensive matte boxes and it's a rip-off! Btw, my friend is working in one small manufacture with tin and alluminium. He is also a passionate hobby videographer with DVC80. He made great looking 2 filter holder+matte box and now is working on same for my XM2. He is also considering to make those for $$ not for $$$. -->>> If you're talking about a good matte box for less than $300, I'd definitely be interested.

August 31st, 2004, 03:34 PM	#9
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,801	That looks like a pretty big thing to hang off the lens without any rods to support...

September 9th, 2004, 06:07 PM	#10
Thomas Smith Jr Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Oxnard, CA Posts: 26	I just got my Formatt FM-500 and my 58mm ring adapter. First the Formatt website says that the XM2 (They don't list the Gl2 on their website only the xm2 but I knew that they were the same camera) requires a 52mm ring. Which made me wonder seeing as how I am 100% certain that my GL2 has a 58mm thread. The 58mm ring worked fine. I was pretty dissapointed that there was absolutley no documentation in the box. I nearly destroyed my flag trying to put it on and found I was doing it the wrong way. I know it's fairly simple and I probably wouldn't have read it before I tried installing but a little one-page diagram would have been real nice of them to include. After succesfully installing it, I realized that this thing WAS NOT designed for the GL2 (I know nobody said it was but they did list the XM2 as "compatible" on their website). The idea of having flat-glass filters is so you can change them ease but when the mattebox is fully installed on to the GL2, a filter can not be added or removed from either stage without completley removing the matte box entirely because of the GL2s built-on microphone. Also, The 360 degree rotational stage turns in to a 15 degree rotational stage.... because of the built-on microphone. I really like the way this thing looks on my camera. I mean, if anything, it makes the camera look cool. But I don't think "looking cool" is enough to outweigh all the cons created by it's inate incompatbility with my particular camera. And seeing as how this matte box is like $500-$1000 less then any other cool looking matte box (the cinetactics matteblox looks lame imo) I think this is my only choice in the filter-holder/sunshade/french-flag-waving/cooler-look department. I also have a question that I am hoping one of you can answer: Why would you have something that is supposed to keep light away from the front lens element have big holes in it that leak light from behind the camera? You can see the one of the fours holes I am speaking of in the picture: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...d/DSC00048.jpg. Am I missing something?

September 9th, 2004, 06:22 PM	#11
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,801	Maybe it has something to do with why those other cool-looking matteboxes cost $500-$1000 more?... ;-)

September 14th, 2004, 03:08 PM	#12
Rocky Pope New Boot Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ronkonkoma, NY Posts: 7	GL2 Microphone Thomas, I have also heard people inquiring if the GL2's microphone was removable. I understand your dilemma. But from what I've seen here and elsewhere, it isn't removable. :-( Don't take this as being the last word on the subject. Check around elsewhere, and post back if you find anything. Regards, Rocky