Am I going to need rails?

[HotLikeBea]

Prepare yourself for foolish inquiries...

I've just placed an order for the Jag35 adapter. Is it necessary to have rails for my camera when having it attached, or will I be able to film safely (without the risk of breaking the threads) so long as I have one hand holding the front?

Also, when I'm out on vacation I tend to whip out my camera from my purse and shoot things on a whim; during my trip to New York City last year it was imperative that I quickly captured footage the second I saw something since I was on one of those touristy double-decker buses...and I just don't see that happening with a bulky, heavy rail setup. Am I better off just shooting without the rails and adapter altogether?

Thanks in advance! :)

[WesScog]

It depends on what camera you've got it attached too, and what kind of glass you're hanging off the front of the adapter?

If you're pulling out some heavy metal, and you're throwing a 20 pound telephoto on the front of it, YES, you'll need some rails.

If you're just putting a typical stock SLR style lens on the front, you're not going to need a rail, and you can get by fine by holding it.

Rails are primarily for holding it in place for extended periods of time, and when you can't hold it all of the time, but if you're just holding it, it should be fine, but it's going to usually be a big hassle working the manual controls, pulling focus, AND holding the lens all at the same time.

So yea, usually most of the time you probably won't need rails, but it's a good idea to have some rails for the future since you don't want to be constrained by having to constantly hold it.

As for what you're "better" shooting with, that is entirely up to you. Without a rail or adapter, with just the light camera form factor, it's of course going to be easier to take it places and whip it out, and you're not going to have to worry about working the pull focus, and adjusting the aperture, etc.

But you're also losing some flexibility and control, without the kind of glass you want on there.

So really with our current technology it is a balance between ease of use, small size, and less weight, compared to more control. So it's kind of a matter of what you need for the situation.

[HotLikeBea]

Ah, WesScog, here to save the day with his words of wisdom :) I got excited when I saw that you replied to my thread.

I purchased the Jag35 student bundle which includes the adapter + a Canon lens, and I decided to include the achromat to my order... I'm going to be slapping all this on my HV40 that I just ordered. So that being said, when shooting with the adapter and achromat, and a cheap lens hood I bought, I should be alright so long as I'm holding it (although, as you've said, it'll be a hassle when it comes to multitasking). Is it a bad idea if I shoot without using one hand to support the heavier front from time to time? Is that a surefire way of damaging the threads?

N00b questions, I know, but I've done my research and still hadn't found a clear-cut answer that really pertained to my inquiries. I figured it's better to ask than to break something and find out myself.

[WesScog]

It could POTENTIALLY damage the threads long term. Generally the threads on the front of the Canon are not the strongest, especially for the consumer/prosumer borderline models.

They are primarily designed for those very small lens attachments, like this. http://www.amazon.com/0-6x-Angle-Converter-Compact-Camcorders/dp/B000E8FLA2/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=home-garden&qid=1252439104&sr=8-3

So when you're putting something that can weigh close to a full pound on something that was at most designed to hold a few ounces, that is significant material stress issue.

It's also not so much the weight (which is still a major factor), but the length. Like think of levers right? A very long see-saw can more easily lift a heavy rock than a shorter see-saw.

The lens being very heavy is not the primary issue, it's the LENGTH of the lens. The longer the lens is out, the more lateral stress it's putting on the top of the threading, making it more easily break.

So think of the top of the threading as the rock, and think of the lens as the see-saw. The longer the lens, the easier it is to break the threading. Generally a typical canon still lens is at about what 7.5-9 cm? The JAG35 at about the same length or so? So we're dealing with a lever of between 15-18cm or so?

The majority of the body appears to be made of Polycarbonates, but I am unsure if the threading shares the same plastic formulation, (I am examining my own older Canon's threading right now), it could possibly be a high-density nylon, but regardless, I would estimate that it is a plastic with a rather high tensile strength rating. Polycarbonates have tensile strength ratings around 10,000PSI, but the issue is that we're dealing with a lot less than a full square inch of material, in a corkscrew structure.

So I could make a calculation chart based on length and lens weights that would tell you what general lateral stress parameters you can stay in without a rail system, but that would take some time and it'd be based on a few assumptions that I can't know with certainty, specifically not knowing WHAT plastic the threading is made from, AND not knowing the precise conversion factors for dealing with twisted structure like this (since dealing with weight-stress distribution on a corkscrew is dramatically difference than calculating tensile stress of a wire or rod). It would also be assuming ideal conditions, and as we all know materials (specifically thermosensitive plastics) can dramatically change within a realm of just a dozen degrees are so, making any kind of tensile strength calculations only applicable under specific unchanging conditions, and then there is the aspect of dealing with a potential non-linear drop in tensile strengths based on prolonged stresses (as some plastics can lose strength in a non-regular fashion based on tensile stresses).

It's just the Canon's thread is NOT designed to add a full 35mm adapter onto it, so eventually putting it under stresses it's not designed for, it WILL break, it's just a matter of on what timescale. Generally using a smaller lens, and less weight, on a relatively short adapter... you're looking at it breaking maybe on the scale of a decade or more of prolonged use without rails.

But it WILL break, and I could be way off either positively or negatively. So I would advise a rail for any plans of long-term use, but for a lens and adapter that small/light it shouldn't be a major immediate concern.

Obviously running, bouncing the camera around, and other realities of camera operation, and the addition of a matte box will put additional stresses that would be more difficult to predict in any kind of linear fashion (since you're dealing with a more random string of potential stress factors).

So my advice is to be careful with it, hold it carefully, and protect your camera. While rails shouldn't be an immediate concern if you hold it carefully, I think that for the sake of ease on you a rail system should be something you should consider in the future, especially if you'd like to easily use a matte box system.

[DigitalVideo]

Well, if you're honestly going to always have one hand on the lens, the support from the hand should be fine. My hand works for me when I'm off my rig.

[HotLikeBea]

I definitely plan on investing in some rails in the future, my wallet needs to recover for now after having just ordered a new camcorder + all the accessories. Thanks for your help, both of you. Wes, thank you mucho for going above and beyond in helping me have a better understanding. You guys rock!

[TiE_Shepherd]

during my trip to New York City last year it was imperative that I quickly captured footage the second I saw something since I was on one of those touristy double-decker buses...and I just don't see that happening with a bulky, heavy rail setup. Am I better off just shooting without the rails and adapter altogether?

At the very least I would loose the adapter when on a bus tour. Shooting with a 35mm adapter is anything but point and shoot. While it might be fine shooting as your walking around town, it's going to be a nightmare trying to shoot from a moving vehicle and only getting one shot at capturing things.

[HotLikeBea]

At the very least I would loose the adapter when on a bus tour. Shooting with a 35mm adapter is anything but point and shoot. While it might be fine shooting as your walking around town, it's going to be a nightmare trying to shoot from a moving vehicle and only getting one shot at capturing things.
Yep, that's exactly what I was thinking. I intend on leaving it off my camera for times when I'm shooting in a spur of the moment. Plus it just seems like a drag having to lug something so big and bulky around when times like those require something lightweight and fast and easy to operate on a second's notice.

[HotLikeBea]

Ahhh, so because my new camcorder is coming in tomorrow via UPS (with the Jag35 adapter in a few more days), I gave in and forked out the $109 for the Shrigg Rig, along with a cheap cold shoe mount from B&H to attach my Rode mic on top. I got a little scared of taking a huge risk in slapping on too much unsupported weight on front of the camera.

[gonzo_entertainment]

Ahhh, so because my new camcorder is coming in tomorrow via UPS (with the Jag35 adapter in a few more days), I gave in and forked out the $109 for the Shrigg Rig, along with a cheap cold shoe mount from B&H to attach my Rode mic on top. I got a little scared of taking a huge risk in slapping on too much unsupported weight on front of the camera.

Probably a good decision. "Penny wise and pound foolish" as they say.