Recent Posts

11

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Fitting the Micro Four Thirds Mount

« Last post by Visualtec on March 14, 2023, 08:59:19 AM »

Thanks for the offer of a video. I will have a go and if I get stuck I will take you up on the offer ! I will remove the mount ring thanks

12

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Fitting the Micro Four Thirds Mount

« Last post by Nikon1 on March 14, 2023, 08:38:04 AM »

Make sure the Camera Front Surface is Clean when Mounting, also make sure to Remove the Stainless CS-Mount Ring together with The Screw and Clamping Rod when using anything like the Focal Reducer.
 Then proceed to Figure out the Correct Shims to put under it.
 Tighten The Screws firmly, but dont over torque the Screws, as that can damage and Distort the Camera Body or the Threads inside the Camera.
 Proper Torque for Fastening these Screws is about 1,4Nm if you happen to have a small Torque Driver.
 .
 Other than that, there is not much to it really, but if you want, i can shoot a Quick "How-To" Video and post that, so you can follow that in Detail.

13

Chronos User Discussion / Fitting the Micro Four Thirds Mount

« Last post by Visualtec on March 14, 2023, 08:28:51 AM »

I have just purchased the Kron Micro Four Thirds Mount is there anything need to watch out for when fitting it ? I also have the Aputure DEC lens regain 0.75x focal reducer, adapter EF to MFT, wireless focus. The idea is I can use my Canon EF macro lenses and control the aperture. I'm not sure if the .75 will be a problem but I will find out when its fitted I guess.

14

Chronos User Discussion / Re: upgrade to Chronos 2.1-HD for higher fps at lower resolution?

« Last post by Nikon1 on March 14, 2023, 07:17:12 AM »

well, it can go down to 640px Horizontal, but that will not Increase the Maximum Framerate. It will however allow you to increase the Record time, as the File-Size per Frame is smaller because less pixels, so it can fit more Frames in the Memory.
 So it can still be useful, if you try to Record some Long Event or Process, and need the High Framerate.
  .
 And, yes Sensors that can do that and even way higher performance ones are Available, but every bit better these get, they get MUCH more Expensive.
 Also, the LUX2100 can do Plenty more than what the Chronos 2.1 Specs are, but the Electronics inside the Camera Limit what they can Pull from the Sensor.
 Same as with the Sensor, that Electronic for Readout of the Data also gets very Expensive fast when it gets really high end.
 In the 2.1 the Readout Electronics can keep up well enough with the Sensor for the Most part on the High Resolutions, but for the Really Fast Framerates that Sensor could handle in Theory, the Camera just cant read it fast enough from the Sensor, so it tops out.
 The LUX2100 could apparently do 125,000 FPS @ 1920 x 8 (Full Sensor Width, 8px High), just the Problem is, Rest of the Camera is not able to keep up with that.
 See:
 luxima.com/product_briefs/LUX2100.html
 forum.krontech.ca/index.php?topic=463.0
 .
 There has been some Thread somewhere here, where Somebody from Krontech Posted instructions on How to Mod the Firmware, so you are able to Reduce the Resolution on the 1.4 so far, that you can get 100kfps on it, As it is not officially supported, and has pretty bad image Quality and is unstable.
 Its Still not Clear, if something like this could also be Possible on the 2.1 (not quite that Extreme like on the 1.4 probably, but even 35kfps on the 2.1 would be a pretty big thing), but it seems like the 2.1 is much more Limited by the Hardware of the Camera on those high Framerates than the 1.4
 .
 That being said, the LUX1310 the 1.4 uses is apparently able to do 1 Million "Frames" ( Lines) per Second, if used at Full Sensor width, but only 1 px High. So basically a Line-Scan Sensor.
 luxima.com/product_briefs/LUX1310.html
 How Realistic or Practicaly Possible it is to Reach that is a whole other story, just like on the 2.1, as you also need to read all of that Data off the Sensor fast enough, and not all of those chips needed for Readout of the Sensor like such weird or small Resolutions.

15

Chronos User Discussion / Re: upgrade to Chronos 2.1-HD for higher fps at lower resolution?

« Last post by AIAS on March 13, 2023, 10:36:26 PM »

Thank you very much for the clarification. it is an unfortunate that it cannot go below 832px due to hardware limitations, but still the Chronos 2.1-HD is a very good and affordable high speed camera and it seems that it was meant to be for media production industry and the Chronos 1.4 for both.

I wish it took all the advantages of its LUX2100 capabilities, but off course the price would go higher.

16

Chronos User Discussion / Re: upgrade to Chronos 2.1-HD for higher fps at lower resolution?

« Last post by Nikon1 on March 13, 2023, 07:14:34 AM »

As a Small addition to above Post of me, a little Clarification regards the 1920, 1440, 1280, 1024, 800, 640 px Wide Presets and Listed Options including those.
 These Frame Widths are just EXTREMELY Commonly used and de-facto Standard Resolutions for Television an such for ages ( see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution#Resolution_in_various_media    --- you will find all of those listed Image Widths in there, those are the most commonly used ones).
 They are just included and standard Presets (also Listed on the Website) because the Vast Majority of Users, especially those with Media Production Background would want to use these as Default; because among many other Reasons Standard Resolutions are just way nicer to work with generally than some weird non Standard ones.
 .
 However, as explained, the Hardware on the Chip and inside the Camera does not quite match the Standard Resolutions where it performs best (Maximum Pixels per Second Recorded)

17

Chronos User Discussion / Re: upgrade to Chronos 2.1-HD for higher fps at lower resolution?

« Last post by Nikon1 on March 13, 2023, 06:56:40 AM »

Hi also.
 The Stuff mklinger posted about his Resolution vs FPS "Research" is still as Relevant as ever, as those are Hardware Limitations of the Camera.
 So that still holds true, just as he posted it, and Future Updates cant change anything about those Bare FPS / Resolution Performance Numbers.
 That is as long as that same Camera is still built with the same Hardware inside.
 .
 Apart from that, a 336px Wide Frame is just not Possible on the 2.1.
 The Lowest Horizontal Resolution that you can set is 640px Wide.
 And 640px wide by 240px High would allow for a Maximum Framerate of 10488,1fps on my 2.1
 To come back to what mklinger tried to say with his Post is, that you might as well just set it to 832px wide by 240px High, as that still allows for the exact same 10488,1fps Maximum Framerate.
 Lowering the Horizontal Resolution below 832px Wide does not increase the Maximum Possible Framerate.
 .
 Now, I dont have a 1.4 to compare (if 336px Wide is even possible on there?), but am Fairly Certain, that in terms of Framerate, the 1.4 outperforms the 2.1 on the really fast FPS Settings.
 In general, the 1.4 is for when you trying to get the highest Speed, the 2.1 is for getting High Resolution Shots, from how i understand it, while there is plenty of Overlap.
 .
 #EDIT#: Just Checked the Resolution Chart of the 1.4, and 336 / 320 px Wide Resolution is possible, which is probably why it can go so much faster than the 2.1

18

Chronos User Discussion / upgrade to Chronos 2.1-HD for higher fps at lower resolution?

« Last post by AIAS on March 13, 2023, 02:40:38 AM »

Hello everyone

I had the Chronos 1.4 for nearly 3 years and a lot of improvement were done in these years in terms of software updates. well done.

I have the need to go for higher fps and Chronos 2.1-HD would theoretically satisfy my need. for example, at 336 x 240, the Chronos 1.4 would give 15,968 fps (form Data sheet). the Chronos 2.1-HD theoretically would give nearly 26,000 fps. mklinger posted a very handy resolution vs fps chart, you can view it here: https://forum.krontech.ca/index.php?topic=629.msg4103#msg4103

you can see that we only have 4 options for the horizontal length (1920, 1472, 1152, 832). Is it a limitation from the new sensor or could be improved/already solved with new software updates?

BTW, mklinger is a very old post, and the specifications of the Chronos 2.1-HD in the official store shows different horizontal length options (1920, 1440, 1280, 1024, 800, 640) but still doesn't show the capability of going down to 336 for example.


Please advise. Thank you,

19

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Sell or Keep Chronos 1.4 8GB? Paper weight?

« Last post by Nikon1 on March 10, 2023, 07:05:32 PM »

That Camera is currently selling for 4.5k USD, those Lenses you have do not add all that much value (maybe 70 to 200 USD in used Condition i guess).
 A Thing to consider is that the Chronos 1.4 Cameras that are currently sold have a updated Internal Screen from the version you have, which adds a bunch of value.
 Still, depending on Cosmetic Condition that Entire Kit you have there should still be worth at least something like 1.5k USD as long as the Camera is working / Properly Recording and does not have any major defects.
 If it is in Like-New-Condition and comes with original Charger and Batteries, you maybe even able to get close to what you paid.
 But it is far from Worthless fyi.

20

Chronos User Discussion / Sell or Keep Chronos 1.4 8GB? Paper weight?

« Last post by Jeffroe on March 10, 2023, 06:51:59 PM »

I believe this is my first post, so please excuse me if I'm stepping on anyone's toes.

I purchased this camera in 2019 on eBay as a used item. Its specs include:

1 x CR14-1.0-8C
1 x TV Zoom Lens 1:16/12.5-75
1 x GE TV Lens 25mm 1:1.4
1 x 20mm extender tube
1 x 40mm extender tube
1 x 32GB V30 Micro SD
1 x carrying case

I used this camera for shooting slow-motion hail ice cannon impacts on various shingles in late 2019, but since then it has mostly collected dust. Earlier today (March 3, 2023), I contacted support to check its current value, which I estimate to be around $5,000, including the extras. However, after researching on Facebook and eBay, I couldn't find any recent sales, except for one completed eBay purchase for $118, which is almost a joke. I'd rather keep the camera than sell it for such a low price. I'm hoping to get what I paid for it (around $3,100ish), but if that's not possible or if nobody's interested, then I'll keep it for future random needs.