Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Schaller
(Post 647888)
1) how did JVC establish the price for this? I've been puzzled to see reaction here that this price is reasonable, but then it gets compared to other film-video lens adapters and, indeed, they are expensive. But then, is this just a price that was picked because that's what everyone else is charging, or is it a meaningful reflection of how much it costs JVC to produce? I know it sounds old fashioned to say it, but shouldn't prices reflect production costs and not just how much the market will bear?
|
I don't know, but I would imagine they made the price as low as possible to still justify the extensive R&D and production costs that went into it. You can't really compare the JVC adapter to any of the 35mm ground glass adapters on the market (even the
P+S mini35 at $9000+) It is totally different in almost every respect. The closest comparitive product is the Angenuix/Zeiss CLA-35, which I believe sells for around $30,000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Schaller
(Post 647888)
2) by pricing it this high, JVC has dramatically reduced the number of them that will sell. Why not charge less, and sell more units?
|
This product is all about optical quality. It is designed for those renting Zeiss, Century, Cooke PL lenses, not some old SLR lens you find on ebay. Will it appeal to the MASS market? Probably not.
I think Redrock, Brevis, Letus, etc will still enjoy great success that segment of the market. The market of the HZ-CA13U will be film schools, small production companies (music videos, pilots, commercials,) even corporate/industrial production companies. The ability to use high quality prime lenses (as well as snorkels, shift/tilts, anamorphics, etc) and resolve an unaberrated resolution as good as the Fujinon 13x3.5mm lens ($12000?) will be the main selling feature. The ability to use longer focal lengths than 1/3" to achieve shorter DoF, and the ability to shoot in low-light, is just the icing on the cake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Schaller
(Post 647888)
3) so, it's essentially a relay lens, that reprojects a focused lens image onto the camera's sensor. That's complicated, and also relatively bulky. Why not make a simpler adapter that accepts a pl lens (or a c-mount, for that matter) and changes the back-focal length so that it hits the camera sensor directly? Granted, I am not particularly knowledgeable about optics, but is this not a simpler idea (to have just the camera sensor focal plane) than a full-on relay lens system that essentially results in two (matching) focal planes? Couldn't such an adapter be less bulky, have fewer optical elements, and be less expensive?
|
Zörk and Les Bosher make simple mechanical lens adapters for Nikon, Canon, PL, etc. There is nothing wrong with that except that lenses designed for film (especially 35mm) do not perform well in split prism CCD systems, and you won't gain the benefits of longer focal lengths. You mentioned the bad chromatic aberration of the stock zoom lens... and that lens was
designed for the system! 3-CCD prisms require very well aligned glass. I'd imagine that the bulk of the R&D for the HZ-CA13U went into correcting the aberration due to the general incompatibility of film lenses and 3-CCD prisms. Keep in mind that the circle of confusion of a 1/3" CCD is probably less than half that of 35mm film, and the Depth of Focus (not to be confused with Depth of Field) is even more critical in a CCD prism system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Schaller
(Post 647888)
4) could JVC make something simpler (in addition to the HZ CA13U, now that it's developed), like the above, that didn't work so hard to preserve the focal length and depth of field properties of the original 16mm lens? A 1/3" sensor is more like a Super-8 frame than 16mm, so clearly this required some doing. Why not just make the simplest possible adapter, and let the user compensate for differences? What they've released, by all reports, works really well, but for me it doesn't work at all since I don't -- and likely won't -- have one. So, why not also make a cheaper version that would allow the rest of us to at least be able to use our better lenses, even if the focal length and dof are changed?
|
Actually, 1/3" is around 75% the size of Super-8. See my response to #3 above or send an email to
Les Bosher and/or
Zörk. They have both made Nikon adapters for JVC's 1/3" mount. JVC also has a history of making fairly high quality Nikon and C-Mount adapters for the 2/3" bayonet mount. Using the ACM-17 1/3" to 2/3" adapter one of these adapters would fit perfectly, and maintain a focal length for focal length relationship to 1/3". I own some of the C-Mount adapters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Schaller
(Post 647888)
5) could anyone out there convince me that this adapter really is worth the money, and that I ought to find it and buy one?
|
JVC is taking it on the road so you can get up close and personal.
Dallas is the first stop next week, and I think they are going to 7 other cities soon. I am providing footage of my detailed tests with DoF charts for a wide range of lenses and focal lengths (Cooke S4, Zeiss Ultra Speeds, Zeiss Super Speeds, Zeiss "regular" T2.1, Century 6mm, Clairmont anamorphics, etc.) as well as practical tests.
I reviewed it for Videography magazine and that article should be in the next issue. I will also provide supplemental samples on my website when that review is published.