Mark Schlicher

There's a discussion about it on Reduser.net, too. Looks like it's loosely based on the consumer WHDI solutions with a few refinements. Reception could be limited by the lack of multiple antennas?

Tx powered by a d-tap to 5V converting cable (included), Rx by 5V USB Lithium batteries (which I don't think are included). Looking forward to your impressions!

Lots of the cheapie monitors have narrow ranges of acceptable voltages (and poor documentation.) So there's a chance of blowing up a "12V" monitor with an unregulated 14.4V (up to 16V right off the charger) from a p-tap. This goes for your prompter as well as the return monitor.

Second to what Afton has said. Use an external HDMI cable. Tiffen's HDMI Pilot will substitute a non-telescoping aluminum post...I've not seen it but I bet they run a pre-built HDMI cable down this non-telescoping post.

Epic body only nominally draws 60 watts. I had problems with older rental house Sony v-lock lithium batteries that crapped out after about 20 minutes, but newly recelled Dionic 90 performed just fine. Also shutdown problems when powering up a Bartech receiver on the Zephyr sled after the camera was already on. Epic appears very sensitive to the voltage level.

Mint, like new condition. Lentequip Steadicam plate, featuring the floating nut design. Beautifully designed and machined.

New it's $195, selling for $150 plus shipping (Ground shipping should be about $8 in the continental US).

Link to item on Lentequip website

If you have the parts laying around, you can build a cheap backup cable using XLR and D-tap connectors, assuming your sled is the AB version...much easier to build with modest soldering skills compared to a lemo cable.

You will find that your arm will float level with about 35-37lbs total (camera, batts, sled...everything). More than that, you run out of adjustment and the arm starts to sag. The 23-24lb camera weight is an estimate that is indirectly derived by Tiffen from this arm limit.

From my conversations with Peter Abraham and Micheal Craigs, the Zephyr system parts are all engineered to the same overall limit, with some reasonable margin for safety.

So you may have to monkey around with reducing camera weight, weight placement, and post length in order to keep the total weight under that limit, but the rule of thumb as i understand it is, if the arm can lift it, the system will handle it.

Specific suggestion:

The bottom of the sled is light, especially if you have an SD Zephyr with its very light monitor. With heavier cameras you definitely benefit from adding weight to the bottom of the sled, to keep the post short. Tiffen sells weights, but I prefer the second battery hanger. You'll have to experiment with battery sizes and placement to achieve both static and dynamic balance. Cheap way to go is make weights and screw to the bottom of the centerpost, there's a 1/4-20 screw hole.

Zephyr doesn't handle very well with a long post, as it has a small diameter and not very rigid with heavy loads.

I'd love it if these cables found a new home...no reasonable offer refused.

I called late last year and asked for Leslie, told she wasn't with them anymore. I'd previously spoken with her in June.

Can't find notes on who I ordered from...but my receipt shows Karen Gormick as salesperson.

Alas Leslie is no longer there...

I bought a six-footer from Phoenix cable. Last job I did, I looped it between the stage and shoulder pad (similar to what you are describing), then let it drop in a loop next to the centerpost, and secured to my right shoulder. Worked pretty good, but I'm still getting comfortable...

Very nice work, Bryant.

The only shot that stood out to me as being below the quality of the others is the night exterior of the little girl. Anything else would just be quibbling...

David,

Bartech...

http://www.steadicamforum.com/index.php?showtopic=16064&pid=76482&st=0entry76482

For anyone who is interested, and doesn't have the fortunate opportunity to design and shoot their own tests, I recommend trying to get to a projected screening of the Zacuto tests. Not the same as watching at a grading suite, but of course it's better than watching it on the web.

There was no question that the Alexa had a superior image than any of the lower end cameras, with more latitude and very pleasing colorimetry.

By the way, I forgot to mention that Bruce Logan, ASC designed and supervised the tests.

Spoiler alert:

"Yes, you can."

"No, you can't."

Enjoy...

Zacuto's shootout didn't include the Nikon; they declined to participate and provide a camera for the test, as I understand it.

"Match quite well" is my subjective description, not intended to imply technical parity. Just that the look and dynamic range held up surprising well, and had a visually pleasing quality that was closer to the Alexa's "look" than many other cameras in the test. My completely subjective opinion, but one that was shared by others in the audience.

I'd expected it to look nearly as bad as the Canon 7D that was also tested, but it was miles better.

The test consisted of three pre-lit shots on a studio set with actors, designed with very high contrast ratio. Each camera was under the supervision of a separate "master DP", and was shot raw if the camera supported it, or with a scene file/picture profile selected by the DP to maximize the camera's capabilities. The shots were then all "one-light" graded by the colorist and Filmworkers/Chicago.

In a second round of tests, the DP's were allowed a limited amount of time to augment the base lighting, to make the most aesthetically pleasing image for their camera, (and control contrast). Then each DP did a supervised grade, including power windows and other capabilites of the colorist's machine, to wring every last ounce of quality they could from the image.

All the cameras had a Fujinon cinema zoom except the Canons, because Canon chose to use their own new cinema zoom lens.

The presentation was broken up into three sections with discussion in between. The second round of tests was presented "blind".

It was projected on the theatre's DLP 2k projector. When they release the presentation online next month, they will include technical data on the camera settings and lighting setups used, including spot readings.

They are touring this presentation to several markets in the next few weeks and I recommend checking it out.

Just saw Zacuto's "Revenge of the Great Camera Shootout" presentation, projected in a theatre. One takeaway for me is that the Canon C300 delivers a picture that can match quite well with an Alexa. Local DP's are using it already as b-camera for Alexa shoots.

 

I didn't expect to like the C300 picture as much as I did, particularly as an 8-bit, low-bitrate camera.

 

Really nice commercial about the new Arri Alexa M, including nice Steadicam-Shots.

 

 

 

Beg to differ. We just shot tests this week with the C300 and it's NOT a match. Infact the Nikon D800 looked better

Just saw Zacuto's "Revenge of the Great Camera Shootout" presentation, projected in a theatre. One takeaway for me is that the Canon C300 delivers a picture that can match quite well with an Alexa. Local DP's are using it already as b-camera for Alexa shoots.

I didn't expect to like the C300 picture as much as I did, particularly as an 8-bit, low-bitrate camera.

Really nice commercial about the new Arri Alexa M, including nice Steadicam-Shots.

 

David,

Specifically to the Hocus Focus:

Peter Hoare (Hocus Focus) is a forum contributor and from all indications is a solid guy. He will be the first to point out that the original Hocus Focus will only turn DSLR lenses and video lenses. Not designed for stiff cinema lenses.

I have not played with the HoFo. There are a number of them being used in the field, maybe someone can pipe up with their experiences re: reliability.

His new, completely redesigned heavy duty digital unit is nearly ready to being released, I believe. I believe it will be close in price to a Bartech.

When I was considering the same questions you are, I opted for a used BFD that I bought on the forum. Used units come up for sale from time to time for $3000-4000 and up, depending on accessories.

I agree with both Kevin and Wolfgang. If you plan to shoot only a personally-owned C300, the Zephyr is a very good match, with enough headroom for typical accessories. But if you aspire to be a freelance operator, handling a variety of (heavier) cameras, a good used bigger rig, such as the Archer Kevin linked to, could be a much smarter choice in the long run. The Flyer LE and Scout will fly a bare C300 easily, but Kevin is right about accessories adding up quickly. You have to be smart and realistic in how you accessorize if you really are committed to Flyer LE or Scout.

Both the Zephyr and Scout are such new models that you are unlikely to find a used one.

A used Flyer LE seems to go for almost as much as a new Scout (though you may get more accessories in a used package). The capacities are roughly similar, and each rig has pluses and minuses. Also try DVXUser.com; they have an active buy/sell forum where you are more likely to find lightweight rigs for sale.

The Marshall 6.5 is a good choice...as is the 800 nit 7" Marshall. The 7" is larger less expensive and 16x9 vs. 4x3, and the HDMI version has a DSLR resize function.

The 6.5 is the hands-down winner in daylight, and that may tip it for you, depending on how often you find yourself shooting in sunlight.

David,

Welcome to the forum and thanks for the kind words. Janice is, as usual, dead on the money in her advice.

The Flyer standard def monitor is actually a very good little SD monitor, well-matched to the Flyer rig. 9" is too heavy, and bigger than practical for operating, and more resolution than you need for framing. If you must have a playback monitor to check focus in HD, hang up the rig and tether to video village. You don't want production hovering around your sled between takes asking to watch playback while you wear the rig...and if your monitor is TOO good, that's exactly what could happen.

Zephyr owners...buy this from Ozzie and I will let you in on a way to easily mod this to mount your BFD receiver to your camera stage. :-)

David,

You will probably need to go to a cable builder who is experienced with Steadicam cables specifically. The reason is that there is more than one "standard" pin arrangement for 9-pin DIN connectors (not referring to pinouts, but actual physical placement of the pins). Terry West is your first call. (310) 621-5063.

When I owned a Flyer I searched for a pre-built cable like that, and was never able to find one.

I also second Alec's concern. The Flanders have a nice picture and great features for a general-use field monitor, but the brightness is a deal-breaker on a Steadicam, any Steadicam. Seeing the frame is the first priority. Unless you spend all your days in the studio, you will sooner or later be hosed by 300 nits. The Marshall 6.5" transflective or the 7" high-bright are much better choices, all things considered...at far less than half the price. Perhaps there are brighter alternative monitors at the Flanders price point, I don't know.

All Zephyrs manufactured up until very recently had the "old" gimbal and post extension clamps. These can easily be recognized by the fact that, if you open the clamp, it will freely rotate so that the blue lever part of the clamp hangs vertically. The new clamps have a raised ridge on the Delrin washer that prevents this rotation, so the clamp stays horizontal when open. This is the most visible change they made to the clamps.

If you have the old clamps I strongly recommend contacting Tiffen asap to have them replace the clamps with the updated design. Should be a warranty fix, I would think...

There are two main ways that the old clamps could fail suddenly and with little warning. The lever could jam into an open position, or the screw itself could snap.

One other troubleshooting thought...

Try to duplicate the shot using a camera of approximately the same weight and equivalent lens focal length...a camera that doesn't use a rolling shutter.