Summary: The M2 conversion kit is a brilliantly simple and well-executed rig designed to let videographers outfit a variety of digital video cameras with 35 mm lenses. Shallow depth of field is now within reach for those of us with less than million-dollar budgets but a burning desire to create video images with the richness of film.
Target Apps
Video projects requiring superior image quality and a variety of film-like treatments
What it Costs You
M2 Indie Bundle/HD Edition for Nikon Lenses, $1,295; microFollowFocus Indie Bundle, $645; microAccessoryPod, $295; FollowFocus Whip Bundle (3-inch, 12-inch, 18-inch whips), $175; microWhips (sold individually), $65; microLensSupport, $95
What's Cool
You get nearly immediate gratification. To have an upgrade at this price point will improve any video production.
What's Missing
The M2 unit uses a standard 9-volt battery to power the rotating ground glass CineScreen. Unfortunately, it’s a bit inconvenient to access. Redrock, however, has just introduced the microAccessoryPod, a mounting system that will give you a centralized power source. There’s also a DC Power Adapter option available for $20, something I think should come with the unit.
Specs
Interchangeable lens mounts available for Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, Minolta and PL-mount motion picture lenses,
Includes SD or HD Achromat
Support system with 15 mm rods in 18-inch,12-inch and 9-inch lengths.
Bogen quick release plate
Optional Follow focus optimized for 35mm still lenses
Variable gearing sizes to accommodate different lenses for use with the microFollow Focus
By Nino Del Padre All photos by Robert Zemba/Robert Charles Photography
March 1, 2007 Source: Studio Monthly
Ever since the introduction of the modern day video camera, digital filmmakers and producers of every kind have been striving for that elusive "film look." The advent of affordable high definition camcorders, cinema gamma and 24p has brought us much closer to this ideal. But no matter how good the lighting, composition and subjects are, one thing spells "video," whether miniDV or HD, from a mile away: the lack of cinema-style, shallow depth of field (DOF). DOF is a distance range in which objects appear to be in focus. Deep DOF means that more of the scene will appear in focus, shallow DOF means the range will be smaller and objects closer or further will appear blurred. Also known as selective focus, it’s artfully used by DPs to naturally draw the viewers’ attentions to the primary subject.
Without the M2
This establishing shot was taken with the HVX200’s stock lens. Although sharp and clear, it dramatically illustrates the lack of depth of field that gives standard footage such a flat and nearly 2D appearance.
M2: Incredibly Accurate Selective Focus
In this image sequence, focus was pulled to sharpen the foreground objects and drastically soften the subject and background. A Nikon 85 mm 1.4 lens was used to produce very shallow depth of field and create a dramatic focal point to the images.
Before and After
Our standard lens had virtually no depth of field in this shot while the Nikon 105 mm f 1.8 lens allowed just the closest objects to be in focus. This is something we take for granted in a still photograph but don’t expect from video.
Comments (18) for "Redrock Micro M2 Indie Bundle"
1.
Great article. One quibble though, on advice # 6 — "cinegamma" is designed specifically to create the "cleanest signal possible." It's the least intrusive of the gamma settings. It is not, as many people think, an attempt to build a film-print-like contrast curve into the video, but rather to create a nice, flat image that responds well to color correction. In other words, the perfect match for the M2 and other adapters.
Posted by prolost.com on Friday, March 2, 2007 @ 01:50 PM
2.
Congratulations on a very well focused article!
Now of course we are curious to see how the M2 would fare on a removable lens camera such as the Canon XL H1 (or even a Sony PDW-F350).
Would this have advantages in low light? Any other usage differences?
Posted by B.J. Ahlen on Saturday, March 10, 2007 @ 04:35 PM
3.
Very interesting article/equipment. I am curious, though, if the HVX200 with the stock lens was set to the same aperture and focal length as the HVX200 with the M2 attached. There is no mention, and it would definitely affect the depth of field of the standard video lens test.
I'm also curious if any light sensitivity/aperture is sacrificed when using the M2.
Posted by MJ Hough on Wednesday, March 14, 2007 @ 08:29 AM
4.
Grand article and Grand equipment. I have been using for a few weeks and has revolutionized our movie making! Thanks again to you and Red Rock Micro.
Posted by Rick Herold on Sunday, March 18, 2007 @ 10:26 AM
5.
Great article, very informative, and shame on the author for totally glossing over the fact that the image is flipped in the monitor. I'm assuming that the image is flipped on the tape as well. That's a big pain in the neck if you have to use something like Cineform to import it into your NLE or put a flop effect on every clip.
Posted by JC on Sunday, March 18, 2007 @ 03:47 PM
6.
Hey everyone thanks for the comments. prolost.com: Redrock suggest that you shoot without cinegama. That’s what I am basing my info on. B.J. Ahlen: Good question! That would be one for Redrock. MJ Hough: Yes the HVX200 stock lens was set to the same aperture and focal length as the M2. As I mentioned there is about one and a half stops of light sacrificed when using the M2. JC, I devoted the Monitoring section to the image flip issue. Yes the image is also flipped on the tape or card but it’s really not a big deal. Any NLE is capable of doing this and if you are using a product like Cineform or DVFilm Raylight you can flip the image during the conversion process.
Posted by Nino Del Padre on Sunday, March 18, 2007 @ 07:05 PM
7.
Nice article! However, there's a better 35mm adapter, having used M2 myself in the past, I found Cinevate's Brevis35 to be alot better, smaller and more compact. Barely any light loss and such! You guys should see the new footage taken from this adapter! Its simply amazing!!! Beats M2 by far!
Posted by JM on Tuesday, March 27, 2007 @ 01:22 PM
8.
The redrock M2 is great. We use one with an HVX200 for commercial shoots.
Light Loss is a common question...and the answer varies for us because the HVX-200 has some quirks.
Typically in an outdoor/well-lit environmnet the light loss is just under 1 stop.
In a low light environment--the loss is still just about one stop BUT the HVX-200 behaves differently in lower light. The HVX typically responds with an ASA equivalent of about 320, but in Low light situations it acts more like 100. I don't know why...but that is the functinal reality from our experience. So when shooting the M2 in low light situations with the HVX-200....be prepared with a) fast lenses and b) extra lighting.
Posted by Chirs on Thursday, March 29, 2007 @ 12:31 PM
9.
The redrock M2 is great. We use one with an HVX200 for commercial shoots.
Light Loss is a common question...and the answer varies for us because the HVX-200 has some quirks.
Typically in an outdoor/well-lit environmnet the light loss is just under 1 stop.
In a low light environment--the loss is still just about one stop BUT the HVX-200 behaves differently in lower light. The HVX typically responds with an ASA equivalent of about 320, but in Low light situations it acts more like 100. I don't know why...but that is the functional reality from our experience. So when shooting the M2 in low light situations with the HVX-200....be prepared with a) fast lenses and b) extra lighting.
Posted by Chirs on Thursday, March 29, 2007 @ 12:32 PM
10.
Nice article. But it should be clear that we want LESS depth of field, not MORE. The comments under the pictures should read: "Our standard lens had virtually no SHALLOWNESS of field in this shot..." (instead of DEPTH). And: "Although sharp and clear, it dramatically illustrates the EXCESSIVE depth of field that gives standard footage such a flat and nearly 2D appearance." (not LACK OF depth of field)
Posted by Atilio on Thursday, April 12, 2007 @ 05:13 PM
11.
This seems like a great solution...but when I shot stills commercially, years ago, I used Olympus equipment. So, I am sitting on a pile of quality lenses I would love to use. Can a version of your product be made to accept Olympus primes? This would save me from purchasing redundant gear, and resurrect some old friends! Cheers!
Posted by Michael on Wednesday, May 16, 2007 @ 02:05 PM
12.
We just completed shooting of our movie, 'Pourquoi Moi' using the Redrock M2 on the Canon XL H1 and the XH A1 as a back-up B camera. We have learnt all our lessons and are eagerly awaiting the results of a unique experience in African film making. We shall keep you all posted
Posted by Tunde Kelani on Saturday, June 2, 2007 @ 09:28 AM
13.
how much should I expect to spend on the Nikkon lenses? and if I only wanted to get one, what would be the best choice?
Posted by Will on Tuesday, June 19, 2007 @ 05:37 AM
14.
what about the slr lenses and the ag hvx200, what kind of things are we talking about when those are concerned? i'd probably go with the slr lens, it does some great stuff, especially when we're talking about 60 fps. a lot of people agree, tony scott.
Posted by Johnny B on Monday, July 9, 2007 @ 03:57 PM
15.
What the results like when using a Canon XHA1 and the Red Rock 35 adapter??? Anyone have footage?? Does it compare to the HVX??
Posted by Jeff Hammond on Wednesday, October 3, 2007 @ 05:45 PM
16.
I am also interested in seeing footage of the xha1 with the red rock. can't seem to find much anywhere. anyone know anything?
Posted by o douglas on Tuesday, October 16, 2007 @ 01:09 AM
17.
Anyone know where to get the VariZoom VZS1080B and how much it costs?
Posted by Christian Simpson on Wednesday, October 17, 2007 @ 12:32 AM
18.
The RedRock looks cool but I opted for the new Letus35 Extreme from letusdirect.com. My friend had the M2 and I didn't like having to deal with flipping the monitor to preview the shot correctly. I went with the Letus35 after talking to the folks at letusdirect.com. They were super helpful and answered all of my questions. I still like the M2 and my buddy swears by it, but for the convience and price, the Extreme was a better fit for me.
Posted by Lance Nessil on Wednesday, October 17, 2007 @ 01:33 AM
Watch The Video:
[
