William Demeritt

I'm interested in the Bolt 600, what is the group buy price going to be???

Come on, boys, let's get back to hating on RED.

I'd be curious about their service life No serviceability, as well as RED's support when they need repair. I'll wait until other people have gone thru it before I consider a purchase.

Should be easy to spot. Go to Google Maps, use the satellite imagery of Montana, and look for the pile of M-One motors in someone's back yard next to the pile of opened UPS boxes. Don't like 20 people total live in Montana, shouldn't be too hard.

After party for the Stabilizer Expo then, I guess?

Would we like it to achieve any arbitrary degree of tilt down (or tilt up, depending on how we tie it to the camera), or specific degrees of tilt (1°, 2°, ..., 5°)? I would imagine arbitary degrees would require clamping mechanisms (hex screws, maybe kipp handles) that apply pressure to achieve the tilt angle but could possibly introduce vibration or instability. Specific angles could be keyed into the incline so when locked into place, the shape of the structure holds the tilt angle and the lock maintains position. Of course, I think lots of operators bypass this need by simply adjusting fore/aft on the sled to create the tilt, but having a solution to offer that same flexibility as tilting topstages might be an interesting idea.

Are you sure he didn't have to give it up along with MK-V?

Here's Howard's response:

It's OK, Jim. At least you still own your company.

I have a feeling that depends on how the chinese batteries are wired: if the PTAP gets + and - off of the same wiring line as the terminals that connect to the AB plate, then you'll likely have the same problem? Worth testing, and we didn't have any of those batteries with us when we were testing it.

We did some testing yesterday and discovered something strange that we were able to duplicate numerous times. More testing is needed, and we're going to share what we found with Jack, but in the mean time, I'd make this suggestion to PRO CineLive owners: If you have the CineLive upper and lower junctions, and you're powering a 24v camera (Arri Alexa, etc), I advise you do not use the AUX PTAP on the right side of the CineLive lower junction, or the PTAP on the AUX battery, to power any video equipment that also receives a signal over HD-SDI. So, simply put: if powering a 24v camera, we recommend you don't use the AUX battery PTAP (on CineLive Lower Junction OR AUX battery position) to power video accessories (Teradek Bolt, Hyperdeck Shuttle 2, etc). CAM PTAP is fine. The moral: don't power 12v HD video accessories off AUX PTAP's if you're powering the camera in 24v mode.

Shots fired, repeat, shots fired.

After several years of expos and conventions, I feel like we've seen very few breakthroughs or major changes in our world of Steadicam operation. Monitors are getting brighter and lighter (and cheaper), the accessories are becoming varied, but the core components always seem to stay the same. I'm not sure if people are willing to throw their ideas, their wishes or their dream piece of gear out into the ether where any manufacturer monitoring this forum could snag it and take the credit... but perhaps some people are? So, the question is: What piece of gear do you think someone should be making? What accessory is missing from your kit? What problem do you currently have on set that needs a solution?

What have you encountered?

Ozzie: doing a quick search, the Ultra2 has a different pinout on the 8-pin LEMO for monitor than the PRO. I think it's safe to assume the pinout diagram for the 8-pin LEMO on the Shadow V would likewise match the other Tiffen sleds? Ultra 2 MON LEMO 1: Pwr Gnd 2: +12v Battery 3: Video 4: Video Gnd 5: RX-Data 6: Tally 7: +24v Battery 8: TX-data GPI PRO CineLive MON LEMO 1: Pwr Gnd 2: 12 VDC 3: VIDEO 4: VIDEO GND 5: <<DEAD>> 6: <<DEAD>> 7: Tally 8: Tally Gnd To me, this sounds like something finicky with the HD6. It has the same pin diagram as the HD8, and with John's LEMO, it should power up. I don't know much about the CineMonitor HD6, but I ask: does it need to be set to know to accept power over the accessory port? Might there be some issue with your HD6? It seems to be the most temperamental of the bunch. Perhaps a good test (if you can still find John) is put your monitor on his sled with his cable and power the HD6 thru the 4-pin XLR power, and if it powers on, test the tally. That would isolate some sort of power irregularity? Your 8-pin LEMO works on John's Shadow because the 12v power and PWR GND match the GPI PRO. Powers the monitor, but the tally doesn't match. The Shadow's MON LEMO is tally on pin 6 (not sure which is ground???), but GPI PRO is tally on pin 7 and ground on 8. His monitor on your sled with your cable works because: CineMonitor HD8 MON LEMO 1: GND 2: 10-36V PWR 3: Y/CVBS 2 4: GND VIDEO 5: Pr 6: Pb 7: Run 8: Gnd Run Your cable was made for a GPI PRO sled where all that really matters are 1/2/7/8, or 1+2 = power, and 7+8 = tally. The HD8 is set up exactly that way, so it works. So, moral of the story: his HD8 with your cable on your sled works, but your HD6 with the same pin diagram doesn't. Cable works as it should, sled seems to work as it should with another monitor. To me, that points to the HD6 as a culprit. Did you mean it was "not working over there" in that the tally and all wasn't working, or the monitor itself wasn't working? Perhaps a Transvideo guru can chime in with what might be happening here? I thought John's HD8 worked on your CineLive with your 8-pin LEMO?

You know what they say: never judge a shoot by it's call sheet.

You know what they say: a film in the hand is worth two in the bond holding company.

You know what they say: make hay while you wait for criminal prosecutions.

This photo is so 90's, my phantom pager just went off.

Somedays, I wish I did! :D :wacko: I took your comments entirely as such. I just wanted to give some descriptive feedback (albeit possibly sesquipedalian). I didn't want to come off as "shooting the messenger", since I know you're on the forums and ENORMOUSLY supportive of our community. Not sure if those notes are useful to you or others at Anton Bauer, but just wanted to put it out there. B)

Probably works with strictly analog signals, and I'm guessing locked into a small range of channels (set by a dial somewhere on the chassis)? You can probably find an old Sony TU-1041U VHF receiver on eBay for fairly cheap (<$50), and a Sharkfin antenna will probably be the most costly piece depending on availability and price. Even after all that, you still have an analog transmitter, susceptible to interference, snow, people clamoring "this looks soft" from video village, etc. Maybe just hang onto it until the need arises, then borrow the additional pieces to make it work? I'm betting it'll be a while before you need it.

I would say not supporting PsF leaves the CW-3 dead in the water (for me, anyway). We need a Swiss Army Knife of sorts when it comes to video transmission, and "most signals" doesn't cut it. :blink: Personally, I would be willing to overlook the lack of multi-cast if PsF made it into the CW-3 but kept the same price point.

Paul, As someone who helped me get my current Dionic HC's at CineGear a few years ago, let me just clarify (since that's my quote you copied :) ). I tend to determine my purchases, from top dollar items to small widgets and accessories, by what provides the most versatility for any possible situation. On top of that, I consider what makes the greatest ease of use. The stacking feature is appealing to me because I currently have 2 dual position chargers, which means I can place a max of 4 batteries on charge, and only 2 charging (assuming all 4 are in need of charge). When batteries are charged, I need to swap batteries (or be mindful of swapping batteries) on the charger. With the stackable option, I can keep my same 2 dual position chargers, and stack all 8 batteries. Granted, it still takes the same amount of time, but gone is the possibility of "Oh, this battery never got on charge". Likewise, when at home, I can have all my batteries charging at all times between gigs. Some Steadicam operators will probably make the argument: "Charging the batteries are the responsibility of your AC's, they should have been on their game. Routine for charging batteries shouldn't be on you, the operator." I agree, responsibilities are not in question here. I just don't want to encounter the situation where we're ever losing time on set juggling batteries because an AC forgot when I could have purchased something with multiple options, especially when they're using my kit (and I'm hoping the AC's encourage production to call me back). Likewise, the option to stack other "3 stud" batteries onto the PAGlink will be an interesting experiment. Do I expect to use the stacking feature on my sled while operating? Probably not (although stacking on a PL Micro Charger "wall charger" as a means to keep the sled up while docked is interesting). Is the option attractive? YES. The premium is considerable (about 63% more expensive), but I wonder if the price will drop in the coming months as the product goes thru the usual stages of product saturation. Also, they have a variety of accessories to use on the stackable position when a battery isn't there, such as the PAGlink "Power Hub" (adds 4 PTAP's plus a USB) or the PAGlink Battery Reader. Another feature I did like was reading battery capacity on the battery's LED screen. The AB "RealTime" screen is on a side of the battery I rarely see on my sled, so I can't really use it. I know the new Digital 90 has a percentage screen, but again it's on a "dumb" side of the battery. With regards to what you posted, I'm curious to know about the charge times with greater stacks, and we'll see how they do as they get into the market. Battery construction and holding up to field use are obvious considerations, but at this point, most batteries can withstand a single impact. More importantly, they never should have to withstand one. The safety circuits are probably a worthwhile consideration, and PAG can probably address it themselves? With regards to the Digital 90's, here are some other considerations that Steadicam operators and AC's at NAB who saw them brought up: No flat surfaces, not very velcro friendly for attaching accessories, etc (that's from the AC's). Size: Dionic HC's are 4.06 x 5.46 x 2.34 in (10.31 x 13.87 x 5.94 cm). Digital 90's are 2.70 x 6.50 x 4.40 in (6.86 x 16.51 x 11.18 cm). So they're more narrow, but they're over an inch wider and over 2 inches thicker. Total volume increase is from 51.872184 in^3 to 77.22 in^3. That's a 48.87% increase in total volume per battery. The PAGLink batteries are 5.23622in x 3.30709 in x 1.96 in, for total volume of 33.94 in^3. Weight: Dionic HC's are 1.8lbs, Digital 90's are 2.0lbs. True, we consider batteries as "functional weight", but adding more weight when you don't get greater wH out of them is a consideration. The PAGLink batteries are 1.6lbs. To be honest, I think these Anton Bauer Digital series will have an effect of pushing more people into considering generic batteries (Switronix, GlobalMediaPro, etc) for their raw power needs (cheap, higher watt-hour, etc), or enjoying the new discounts on the Dionic HC/HCX. For people looking to spend a bit more, you'll probably maintain a lot of Anton Bauer users, but the form factor of the Anton Bauer Digital series just changed things for people. Also, completely meaningless in the context of function, but aesthetically speaking... I personally think the Digital series are ugly and silly looking. I also appreciate that the Performance Dual/Quad chargers have the batteries positioned such that you can read the percentage, but it just seems enormous, bulky, heavy and again (sorry) ugly.

I'm betting someone can come up with a clever design for the "tab" surface of those PAG batteries to attach and create a flat surface appropriate for resting on surfaces without enhanced fear of leaving a mark?

That's a bummer.