Which mattebox do you have for your XL H1?

John Richard · June 9th, 2006, 02:44 PM

Thanks Steve - I will check which way the "ridge" is on the lense barrel. It has not created a problem - it still meshs with the gear, just find it worrisome that it isn't more firm - maybe I have the ring gear backwards.

As regards the repeatability of the follow focus - we have had no problem with hitting focus marks - set the focus point and mark the white ring - go to another focus point in the scene - then pull focus based upon the mark and it's in focus. Have not tried pulling multiple focus marks though as in a long shot of subject approaching a camera with landmarks to focus ring marks.

Also be aware that you can use the electronic focus preset to have the camera pull focus for you - it's just that even the slowest preset focus speed is way too fast most of the time for our taste - too distracting-noticeable with the one subject jerking to blur and the new subject jerking to focus. I usually find a slower focus pull less distracting to the viewer. Hope they have a firmware change on those speeds.

Steven Dempsey · June 9th, 2006, 02:49 PM

I have also had no problem pulling multiple focus points. I think the fact that there are no markings on the lens makes it difficult to focus manually but the follow focus system works flawlessly for me.

Michael Fischler · July 24th, 2006, 05:51 PM

Coming back to an old subject - since EVERYBODY reads this forum (great job Chris!!!) there isn't a single Chrosziel follow-focus/matte box kit available at the moment in the USA (and please, if I am wrong LET ME KNOW :-), I'll buy it now!). So my question is - does anyone have any experience with Zacuto and the Petroff system of boxes, rails and follow-focus?

http://store.zacuto.com/manufacturer...ufacturerid=10

Thanks for your input...

Robert Lane · August 5th, 2006, 06:06 PM

I'll be transferring my Zacuto plate/rod system and Century Optics/Vocas matte box to my H1 when I get it next week. I'll post some photos once I get the rig setup. It's an easy way to get the Marshall hooked up without added weight to the camera body itself.

Robert Lane · August 7th, 2006, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

I'll be transferring my Zacuto plate/rod system and Century Optics/Vocas matte box to my H1 when I get it next week...

Actually no, I won't. As it turns out (and explained in the HVX forum) it's not economically or time-feasible to attempt to merge HVX with H1 footage, so i'm staying with the HVX.

Jonas Nystrom · September 14th, 2006, 02:52 PM

Anyone tried the redrock followfocus on XL H1?

Steve Rosen · September 14th, 2006, 06:26 PM

Have you tried Able's, they had 'em a few weeks ago... pricey, but the FF is way better than any others I've used, plus the scale is visible from the viewfinder, which can be useful... Matte box is just a lens hood with nice filter trays, any would be fine as long as the aspect ratio is right...

Patricia Lamm · September 17th, 2006, 11:50 AM

I just received my first mattebox -- the Chrosziel with FF -- and will start the filter-buying process now.

Question: is there a reason to get any 4x5.65 filters or is getting only 4x4's sufficient? I do use the 3x wide-angle lense (and plan to get the 6x wide-angle when it comes out) if that's a factor.

Steve Rosen · September 17th, 2006, 04:14 PM

4x4's should be fine, even with the WA.. I could be wrong, not having seen the lens, but I actually usually use a 3x3 Chrosziel clip-on with my H1 because it's lighter and smaller, and I mostly handhold... The Panavision size filters are expensive (I know, I've got over 20 of them) and significantly heavier.. Chrosziel makes that front holder a combination so people with both sizes have a choice -

I'm not familiar with the DV matte box (my 4x4's an older super16 one I've pulled from my Aaton kit) but if it's similar, the outer side edges of the hood will probably inter the frame before the edge of a 4x4 filter in the front holder...

Patricia Lamm · September 17th, 2006, 05:21 PM

Thank, Steve. It looks like that might be the case with this mattebox as well.

I have not attached mine to the XL H1 yet -- have been awaiting the mailing of the instructions, but given that it's been almost a week, I'm ready to just jump in and try to figure it out.

Is it the case that the rails attach directly to the body of the camera, making the use of the (wonderful) Canon quick release plate no longer possible?

Steve Rosen · September 18th, 2006, 09:17 AM

Patricia: I've never even seen the Canon quick release plate so I don't know how it mounts (I use a 20 year old O'Conner 50 head with it's plate) but my guess is that it will be a problem...

The mattebox base is basically two flat plates seperated by two one inch aluminum dowls that elevate the camera in relation to the mini-rods (which are mounted to the front of the bottom plate).. You may be able to engineer a way to attach the quick release to the bottom plate.. maybe someone here has done it...

My camera is heavy because I use Anton Bauer batteries, a wireless receiver, custom grips (mounted to the mini-rods), follow focus and, occasionally, a grip-mounted 7" monitor - so in my personal opinion the mounting system looks under-built under the camera when it's on a tripod.. I'm sure Chrosziel knows what they're doing, but I reinforced the "dowls" by fabricating pieces of aluminum channel and affixing them to both sides... May not actually be any stronger, but it looks better and provides some peace of mind...

Bill Pryor · September 18th, 2006, 09:30 AM

Hey, another person who uses a tripod forever. I bought my O'Connor 50 in 1985.

Steve Rosen · September 18th, 2006, 09:39 AM

Good head - heavy, which is needed with a heavy (over 10lb) camera... I still use wooden sticks sometimes, too...

Patricia Lamm · September 18th, 2006, 11:49 AM

For what it's worth, I called 16x9 and asked about the ability of the rail support to carry the weight of the camera, A-B battery, 7" monitor, plus mattebox (my current configuration as well). They said it's "no problem at all", although I agree with you that it looks a little undersupported.

Does anyone know what FF gear ring works with the Canon 3x lens? The one in the kit doesn't fit (only fits the 20x) and so far I haven't gotten a response from 16x9.

Steve Rosen · September 19th, 2006, 08:32 AM

Patricia: They may not make a gear for that lens, again, I don't know it...

Get a precise measurement of the diameter of the focus ring area on the lens at several different places (widest and narrowest) and then call someone who deals with film lenses and see if there's an off-the-rack ring that might fit...

Birns & Sawyer used to be good for that sort of thing, don't know if they still are...

June 9th, 2006, 02:49 PM	#47
Steven Dempsey Disjecta Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Seattle, Washington Posts: 937	I have also had no problem pulling multiple focus points. I think the fact that there are no markings on the lens makes it difficult to focus manually but the follow focus system works flawlessly for me. __________________ Try my Digital Therapy: http://www.pinelakefilms.com/digital_therapy.html Films on ExposureRoom: http://exposureroom.com/members/disjecta.aspx/videos/

September 14th, 2006, 02:52 PM	#51
Jonas Nystrom Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Göteborg, Sweden Posts: 306	Anyone tried the redrock followfocus on XL H1? __________________ Jonas Nyström, DoP :: HOT SHOT® SWEDEN :: www.hotshot.nu :: RED #1567, RED 18-50mm T3 :: XL A1, Letus Extreme :: XL H1, 20X & 6X lens (for sale) :: www.vimeo.com/nystrom

September 17th, 2006, 05:21 PM	#55
Patricia Lamm Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Okemos, MI Posts: 174	Thank, Steve. It looks like that might be the case with this mattebox as well. I have not attached mine to the XL H1 yet -- have been awaiting the mailing of the instructions, but given that it's been almost a week, I'm ready to just jump in and try to figure it out. Is it the case that the rails attach directly to the body of the camera, making the use of the (wonderful) Canon quick release plate no longer possible? Last edited by Patricia Lamm; September 17th, 2006 at 07:32 PM.

June 9th, 2006, 02:44 PM	#46
John Richard Major Player Join Date: May 2006 Location: Incline Village, Nevada Posts: 604	Thanks Steve - I will check which way the "ridge" is on the lense barrel. It has not created a problem - it still meshs with the gear, just find it worrisome that it isn't more firm - maybe I have the ring gear backwards. As regards the repeatability of the follow focus - we have had no problem with hitting focus marks - set the focus point and mark the white ring - go to another focus point in the scene - then pull focus based upon the mark and it's in focus. Have not tried pulling multiple focus marks though as in a long shot of subject approaching a camera with landmarks to focus ring marks. Also be aware that you can use the electronic focus preset to have the camera pull focus for you - it's just that even the slowest preset focus speed is way too fast most of the time for our taste - too distracting-noticeable with the one subject jerking to blur and the new subject jerking to focus. I usually find a slower focus pull less distracting to the viewer. Hope they have a firmware change on those speeds.

July 24th, 2006, 05:51 PM	#48
Michael Fischler Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 30	Coming back to an old subject - since EVERYBODY reads this forum (great job Chris!!!) there isn't a single Chrosziel follow-focus/matte box kit available at the moment in the USA (and please, if I am wrong LET ME KNOW :-), I'll buy it now!). So my question is - does anyone have any experience with Zacuto and the Petroff system of boxes, rails and follow-focus? http://store.zacuto.com/manufacturer...ufacturerid=10 Thanks for your input...

August 5th, 2006, 06:06 PM	#49
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,823 Images: 15	I'll be transferring my Zacuto plate/rod system and Century Optics/Vocas matte box to my H1 when I get it next week. I'll post some photos once I get the rig setup. It's an easy way to get the Marshall hooked up without added weight to the camera body itself.

September 14th, 2006, 06:26 PM	#52
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	Have you tried Able's, they had 'em a few weeks ago... pricey, but the FF is way better than any others I've used, plus the scale is visible from the viewfinder, which can be useful... Matte box is just a lens hood with nice filter trays, any would be fine as long as the aspect ratio is right...

September 17th, 2006, 11:50 AM	#53
Patricia Lamm Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Okemos, MI Posts: 174	I just received my first mattebox -- the Chrosziel with FF -- and will start the filter-buying process now. Question: is there a reason to get any 4x5.65 filters or is getting only 4x4's sufficient? I do use the 3x wide-angle lense (and plan to get the 6x wide-angle when it comes out) if that's a factor.

September 17th, 2006, 04:14 PM	#54
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	4x4's should be fine, even with the WA.. I could be wrong, not having seen the lens, but I actually usually use a 3x3 Chrosziel clip-on with my H1 because it's lighter and smaller, and I mostly handhold... The Panavision size filters are expensive (I know, I've got over 20 of them) and significantly heavier.. Chrosziel makes that front holder a combination so people with both sizes have a choice - I'm not familiar with the DV matte box (my 4x4's an older super16 one I've pulled from my Aaton kit) but if it's similar, the outer side edges of the hood will probably inter the frame before the edge of a 4x4 filter in the front holder...

September 18th, 2006, 09:17 AM	#56
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	Patricia: I've never even seen the Canon quick release plate so I don't know how it mounts (I use a 20 year old O'Conner 50 head with it's plate) but my guess is that it will be a problem... The mattebox base is basically two flat plates seperated by two one inch aluminum dowls that elevate the camera in relation to the mini-rods (which are mounted to the front of the bottom plate).. You may be able to engineer a way to attach the quick release to the bottom plate.. maybe someone here has done it... My camera is heavy because I use Anton Bauer batteries, a wireless receiver, custom grips (mounted to the mini-rods), follow focus and, occasionally, a grip-mounted 7" monitor - so in my personal opinion the mounting system looks under-built under the camera when it's on a tripod.. I'm sure Chrosziel knows what they're doing, but I reinforced the "dowls" by fabricating pieces of aluminum channel and affixing them to both sides... May not actually be any stronger, but it looks better and provides some peace of mind...

September 18th, 2006, 09:30 AM	#57
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	Hey, another person who uses a tripod forever. I bought my O'Connor 50 in 1985.

September 18th, 2006, 09:39 AM	#58
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	Good head - heavy, which is needed with a heavy (over 10lb) camera... I still use wooden sticks sometimes, too...

September 18th, 2006, 11:49 AM	#59
Patricia Lamm Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Okemos, MI Posts: 174	For what it's worth, I called 16x9 and asked about the ability of the rail support to carry the weight of the camera, A-B battery, 7" monitor, plus mattebox (my current configuration as well). They said it's "no problem at all", although I agree with you that it looks a little undersupported. Does anyone know what FF gear ring works with the Canon 3x lens? The one in the kit doesn't fit (only fits the 20x) and so far I haven't gotten a response from 16x9.

September 19th, 2006, 08:32 AM	#60
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	Patricia: They may not make a gear for that lens, again, I don't know it... Get a precise measurement of the diameter of the focus ring area on the lens at several different places (widest and narrowest) and then call someone who deals with film lenses and see if there's an off-the-rack ring that might fit... Birns & Sawyer used to be good for that sort of thing, don't know if they still are...