35mm adapter for Sony EX1 or 3

[ericparnell]

Hey Guys,
Checking out cameras, really like the Sony EX series. And I was looking at this lens bundle below, anybody had any experience with these adapters?

Letus35

Also I noticed the EX3 has interchangeable lenses, soo wouldn't it be pointless to use an adapter? Or can you still only change it out with other sony lenses and not primes?

Let me know if you have some insight, thanks!

- Eric

 

[David.rhsc]

I shoot an EX-1 with Redrock M2 and the flip adapter on a regular basis. We use a set of mostly Nikkor primes (35, 55, 85, 135) with a few cheapish Sigma lenses thrown into the mix. Most of this is for higher end corporate video, so we don't get on the Sigmas very often (a zoom, a fish eye 15, a 24, and a 500 mirror).

It works great on the EX-1, although I find Red Rock's follow focus leaves much to be desired. The internal gearing has tons of slop, the "mark" on the follow wheel is like 1/8" (maybe 1/16" or between) wide - too wide for spot on marks. All of this exacerbates the problems of pulling focus on still camera lenses.

Regarding the EX-3, you get the advantage of being able to mount nicer glass directly on the camera. What you don't get is the DoF effects of using the 35mm film plane inside the adapter. Those two cameras use the same sensor setup: 1/2" image planes. This gives both cameras a DoF more like a video camera unless an adapter is used. It *is* possible to get mount rings for the EX-3, even ones for older Nikkor lenses, but there's no real change to DoF characteristics (unless they are spacing them out farther from the sensor in ways I am not aware) since you are still on the smaller 1/2" senors.

What you get out of these adapters is a lens in front of a 35mm plane which generates an image that acts the same as a 35mm camera in terms of focus. You then capture this image with the camera behind the adapter.

The real question is what else you plan to do with the gear, and what your clients can afford in terms of kit rental. For example. We do shoots both with and without the RedRock - because using it costs more to the client so clients only want it when they are willing to pay more for the aesthetic effect. My producer recently bought a second camera, and in deciding between the 1 and the 3, he chose the 1 because pricing out the 3 correctly would limit what clients would be willing to rent it, among other reasons.

So, if you've got folks willing to drop the extra kit rental for the more expensive camera (without the adapter and lenses, remember those cost extra on top of the base kit) then go for it. If you want to service clients with smaller budgets, go for the 1 and retain that market.

Sorry for the long response. The answer to your basic question is that yes, there is a reason to drop an adapter in front of an ex-3.

 

[ericparnell]

Hmm, interesting. The bit about the adapters and the business side. I'm doing very low budget stuff for clients and haven't even mentioned kit rental when pricing projects for them when I was planning on using my own gear. Never really thought of it. Is that standard practice?
You quote them the cost for you to produce it, AND equipment costs regardless if they come from a rental house or your own kit?

 

[CDCosta]

David nailed it on the EX3.

Regarding the adapters; The letus is a great choice. It pre-flips the image, and only looses about a 1/2 stop of light. It is generally a bit grainy, but not too bad. The frame loss(or the amount of frame you loose from the adapters zoom to the outside of the glass) is a small bit, but not bad either. Theres also a small jumping problem while panning.

A better choice would be the P+S Technic Pro35.

It has less grain, ajustable back focus, and has a deeper focus, with a great fall off. So you have a larger area of whats in focus, but the background is still as soft.

 

[David.rhsc]

x2 on the P+S Technik. I haven't used the Letus, so not as familiar with it, but the P+S is miles beyond the Red Rock in build quality and resulting image quality.

Hmm, interesting. The bit about the adapters and the business side. I'm doing very low budget stuff for clients and haven't even mentioned kit rental when pricing projects for them when I was planning on using my own gear. Never really thought of it. Is that standard practice?
You quote them the cost for you to produce it, AND equipment costs regardless if they come from a rental house or your own kit?

Well, that's sort of fuzzy. Generally yes. If you invest in gear it is in your best interest to take the rental budget rather than shrugging it off. The client would have to rent gear when hiring anyone who didn't already own it. That said, lots and lots of folks simply treat their gear as a value-add and don't bother breaking out the rate on paper to show what goes for the gear and what goes for the talent (ie, you). Also, you have to play it by ear sometimes.

Let's say you get a random Craigslist music video gig as their DP. Probably in your interest to just offer them a single rate for you + the gear you're willing to bring. On shows with deeper pockets, they generally expect to see a "kit rental" and a "day rate." A couple years ago I was Production Coordinator on an indie feature. On my deal memo they broke out the rate we agreed on to include part of the day as a "kit rental." Weird to think about for that department, but hey they expected laptops, smart phones, and lots of folks in that line even carry small printers with them to use on location as needed.

Of course you are free to discount your gear based on rental rates in your area, but many folks are of the opinion that you are short-selling yourself and your fellow DP's in the process. In this economy it's a toss up - the most important thing is getting the work. It sounds like you are more of a Producer-Shooter-Editor type - so quoting a single price for the project is going to be what works for your client base.

I'm still fairly new at the freelancing game, pretty certain that Costa has been doing it longer and several others can probably chime in on if/how/when to charge for your gear. I wanted to point it out though, since there is a decent cost difference between the 3 and the 1.

Also, if you are still thinking the 1, I'd look for the 1R. Much nicer viewfinder, VASTLY improved handgrip, HDMI out, better connector layout, and a couple of minor under the hood improvements that I can't recall at the moment.