Personal View site logo
SLR Magic 2x ANAMORPHIC lens
  • 804 Replies sorted by
  • I actually bought a Isco 2001 and the image quality is spectacular. As the taking lens and anamorphic comes in one piece there are no alignment issues at all. The Isco uses much more lens elements than the cheaper ones on the market and the labor cost is therefore much higher as well. Difficult to align so many curved optics also increase manufacturing cost. Most cheaper anamorphics work well at 5.6 only but the Isco works well wide open.

  • @Mihuel It is the materials used and labor precision required. Think of why a f/2 lens usually cost more than a f/5.6 lens. I guess you can use that as a comparison if it makes it easier to understand.

  • If I can make a suggestion based on my experiences.. A focus through would be a very welcome product. If you were to take an LA7200 or Optex/century 16:9 adaptor type anamorphic attachment but optimize for a larger sensor. The LA7200 and optex is designed for small sensor 3chip type cameras meaning they struggle to work when on a larger sensor. rework for a larger sensor (would it be a case of scaling up the design?)

    An example:- gh2 m4/3 looks better than aps-c and apsc looks better than 5dmk2 full frame when using these focus through type lenses.

    I have used a Century 16:9 adaptor on as wide as 28mm on aps-c with good results. event with a +0.4 achromatic diopter it allowed infinity focus! - while minimum focus was 250mm at f5.6

    at f2.8 the lens was fine at medium distances (2mts and further) with achromat +0.4.

    LA7200 and century produce the best flares (or ones that look most like modern day panavisions) - they glow that amazing blue colour and are very pronounced. use these with achromatic diopters and they are amazing.

    I'd suggest a 35mm f2.8 taking lens, and a matched pimped up century style anamorphic 1.33 lens with an achromatic front element (like the tokina.

    Some of my tests which might be helpful:-

    28mm f2.8 taking lens with century 16:9 and tokina +0.4 achromatic diopter

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=Dt6dtR32Fdw&NR=1

    On skateboarding video you see too much chromatic aberrations at edges. a 35mm taking lens will reduce this. if your adaptor were pimped up a bit to suit larger sensor (maybe with just m4/3 coverage-there are enough users of m4/3 and the bmc to make it viable)., I think this would be a goal easier achieved.

  • The ISCO system also has a patent on it. The Century and the Panasonic .. all the focus through adapters that I am aware of rely on the somple principle of having the adapter focused at it's hyperfocal distance .. infinite to as close the elements can produce.

    The ISCO is a patented mechanism which works differently, you can search for the patent information. I don't think I can paraphrase it and be understandable .. while it doesn't have a physical focus screen like a DOF adapter, it's functionality is similar in that the taking lens is focused at infinite (virtual focus screen), and then the adapter is focused .. .. bad explanation perhaps .. the light from the rear of the adapter section are somehow made to be a long long way in the distance, almost parallel.

    I am prepared to be ripped to shreds for this poor explanation, it may induce thinking about the issue in different ways. To my knowledge the only people who have paid to use the patent are Hawk.

    Of other interest, Panavision bought the patent on the Delft curved prism systems in the 60's simple to preserve their monopoly at the time.

    And here is an interesting link for the experimenters: http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/l9113d.html

    Mine have arrived, I haven't mounted them yet, I have the internal workings of a variable squeeze adapter.

  • @richg101 The LA-7200 and Century adapter is not quite a focus through. I guess people call it focus through only because it does not have a focusing mechanism. If you do a search also covered an article where someone modified the LA-7200 to become a focusing adapter and immediately the lens can do close focusing as well as shoot at wide apertures without the use of diopters. It is better if it has focusing mechanism. If we take the focusing mechanism off our adapter would you call that focus through instead?

    @kavadni There are many ways to do focus through but non of them come cheap. It is something we are battling against. We can make a very good adapter that is not affordable or we can make one with compromise but is affordable. Tough decisions.

  • Focus through is hard. But locked off focus is BAD, or at least for me and serves no use. BUT! Could one come up with a system to focus both lenses? My first idea was to essentially just have the barrel of the anamorphic connected to the barrel of the lens, but this will create issues when you have lenses with different throws, but if one could do some way (without making a lens specific anamorphic) so that one could "sync" the focus on both lenses, then you would have a great looking anamorphic that also works wonders!

  • @slrmagic FWIW, I'll buy a good quality new anamorphic for $1K if you make one, no matter if it is 1.33x, 1.5x, 2x, focus-through or double-focus . . . just so long as it lets me get at least as wide as "standard" (~25mm) with the taking lens on GH2 without vignetting. This is currently the true downside of projector anamorphics on GH2. I love my Kowa, but 35mm still feels tight FOV-wise on the GH2, even with the Kowa on front.

  • In the early days I was very eager on buyin a Iscorama 36, a 1.5x anamorphic solution w/o the need of double focus. 1.3x was never and wont be anything that I will be looking into since it is the anamorphic behaviours that I search for.

    Now, that I actually got some good equipment... A Red One, with anamorphic support I am no longer looking into 1.3x or 1.5x solutions but rather 2x. You would think there are alot of good 2x solutions out there, Yes there are. BUT! Theres something missing that I would really love to have. Its a small compact 2x anamorphic adapter in the size of an Iscorama 36-42. Why? Well because I find the ability to use diopters very important. Lomos have a very big front thread which makes it impossible to find affordable diopters. This is a spot I hope someone will fill, may it be SLRMagic or someone else!

    Until then, I guess I be look after a good 35mm Lomo...

    On a side note - It would have been amazing if you made the 50mm T0.95 available in another mount than the M one. I would have bhought one if it suited the R1!

  • @kautto There's actually some cheap Lomo diopters on ebay described as a set of "anamorphic glasses". I emailed the seller and they don't know what models of lens, or what the strength of the diopters are though. Once I sell off one of my excess lenses I may take the plunge and buy the set to see if they would work out!

  • Hey SLR-Magic, how is your project going? any progress? :)

  • @mhmbabel

    It seems the lens we made is not the lens many want. The type many want is either not possible or ridiculously expensive to manufacture (single focus). It is possible to make the lens everyone wants but not possible to offer it at a price below $1500 that everyone wants. This makes the project impossible to move forward unless people accept our prototype or accept a higher budget lens. Due to this the lens is still in R&D stage.

    Many also said if we can make it for within $5000 budget they will prefer it over Iscoramas they can find used in the market but many also said if it will cost $3000 they rather get a used Iscorama. It is quite difficult for us to make a decision on how to move forward.

    @apefos is offering one at a very affordable price. Would be interesting to see the feedback :) We have recommended people in urgent need for an anamorphic to take a look at the Apefoscope priject first. It seems new anamorphic lenses are much more reliable than used ones on the market. We bought a few samples online and many did not even work! We know because we have more than one of the same lens and some just doesn't work even when the seller claims they have tested the lens before.

  • We bought two La7200s at $1,200/piece. Would sure be nice to have something that offers the sort of capabilities the LA does in that price range with a few improvements and easy to find. I think it'd sell like hotcakes.

  • @slrmagic I for one hope to in the future save for an expensive single focus anamorphic adapter or lens. I was hoping that you would manage to come up with something single focus for under $2K, but I'm also not surprised that you've found this a difficult thing to do. Keep up the good work.

    For what it is worth you now have my serious attention when it comes to non-anamorphic lenses since the introduction of your 35mm T0.95. It hits the sweet spot of my optical heart as a lens not tethered to the MFT system (it is APS-C/Super 35 capable, right?), and as an extremely fast near-normal focal length lens with metal construction and built-in lens gears (massive hooray for the gears, BTW).

    I hope you continue your anamorphic ventures. I have a Kowa that I absolutely love and wouldn't part with for anything less than something single focus and comparable in quality. My only option in that arena is an Iscorama, which are becoming scarce, worn out, expensive, and are only 1.5X besides.

    For a gem of a single focus 2X, I'd pay more than I would for a new camera body by half as much again at least. Anyone trying to make incredible images by owning equipment outright (versus renting) will tell you that a masterpiece lens will last far longer than any camera body. I mentioned your 35mm T0.95 because I suspect it might get near this type of lens status.

    I understand that now may not be the time for a magnificent 2X single focus anamorphic in the $3-4K price range, and I also understand if that's a high price you just don't want to touch. But the time will come when most of the available Iscoramas, Kowas, Bolex, Sankors, etc. have been used to extinction. Sadly, one by one they will break, get fungus and be thrown away.

    Then the average joe will no longer have the ability to shoot anamorphic. Big productions can always rent, but there will be above average joes willing to pay that $3-4K price tag for a single focus 2X anamorphic, trust me. There are enough of us now that understand the Vid Atlantic filters just don't make the cut.

  • I'd happily pay up to 5K for a single anamorphic prime that was of comparable quality to the 12mm SLR Magic.

    I'd happily pay 25k for a set of 5 anamorphic primes.

    I'd want the choice of 1.3x OR 2x.

    I'd want them to be at least T2.8.

    I'd want them to be the same stop across the board.

    I'd want options for lens mounts that included PL and m4/3, but it doesn't have to be interchangeable

    Adaptors are of no interest at all to me.

    jb

  • @johnbrawley, Why can't it be a System much as others have suggested. A main Front Element that is part of an interchangeable Set of Primes? It seems to me that from a coast perspective this would be a good compromise. This way it could perhaps be more than just a standard Adapter. Perhaps with a focusing mechanism mated to the primes.

  • I've only recently stumbled on this anamorphic obsession when researching my most recent my most recent purchase of a couple of Samyang Cine Primes, which just arrived yesterday. I think an anamorphic adaptor might almost certainly be my next target though!

    I think I'd be after a 1.33x or 1.35x for the traditional aspect ratio. Although, I've seen it mentioned that the effect of the oval bokeh is reduced - just wondering if that could be rectified by the use of a filter similar to the one that Vid-Atlantic do, but shaped to compensate for what the 1.33x lacks, obviously. Maybe that could be incorporated into the back element of the adaptor (or the iris, if you are creating a lens from scratch) ?

    I shoot on a 7D, with a combination of Samyang Cine & Canon L Series Primes. I'd love an adaptor that I could use with my 24mm, which has a 77mm filter diameter; If the adaptor could mount on to a 15mm rod system, then a lens change would just involve sliding the anamorphic forward, replacing the lens, then sliding the anamorphic back into place, and maybe a locking ring or a clamp just to prevent any independent movement between lens and adaptor. For me, that would be absolute gold!!

  • I saw exactly what you describe on ebay, but it almost certainly wont support a 24mm

    If the adaptor could mount on to a 15mm rod system, then a lens change would just involve sliding the anamorphic forward, replacing the lens, then sliding the anamorphic back into place, and maybe a locking ring or a clamp just to prevent any independent movement between lens and adaptor. For me, that would be absolute gold!

  • The problem with the anamorphic bubble is that those who aspire to shoot it never factor in the hurdles that appear once you got the lens system. It's not just about the money to buy the lens. It takes twice as long to use the things, the lenses weight too much, you can't be as creative because you need to set up the lens every time you want to go from wide to narrow, an affordable adaptor wont ever meet the demands of the internet community who don't care for using lighting and want to shoot at night using a single street light as their light source. They want anamorphic but also f0.95. They don't understand the reasons for anamorphic and to be honest probably wouldnt even notice if you sold them a 50mm f0.95 hyperprime with a streak filter on the front.

    Many want to use with GH2 but the problem with GH2/GH3 is that due to the smaller sensor, the lenses now need to be larger aperture in order to get enough bokeh to notice the ovals and the other funny characteristics. Using a 16:9 sensor means you need a 1.33x squeeze meaning ovals are all but gone. you end up with a slightly stretched image with a bit of flare, but none of the main characteristics. Real 2x anamorphic shot on 4 perf film has lovely pronounced bokeh when shooting with smaller apertures. to get the same on m4/3 you need f2.8 and then the problems start. People want the ovals from 2x, the pronounced bokeh from a large sensor (the size of 4perf ideally), they want one focus ring, they want minimum focus of 1ft, they want sharp to f1.4, they want flares, they want it cheaper than a preowned Iscorama.

    As John Brawley suggested, make something fool proof, at a price that the non esoteric type hire companies have in stock alongside the bog standard 'go to' zeiss cp2's and Canon L lenses. Make a set of 4 for $25k, make them 2x squeeze with intention of taking advantage of 4k+ acquisition in the future (where the increased resolution will negate the worry of cropping a 3.55:1 frame into a 2.39:1 frame. make them f2.8 throughout and designed to cover full frame, with intention of utilising a metabones style speed booster when used on smaller sensors.

    Catering for your existing SLR Magic market group will not yield a successful product because these people can't warrant spending the money on something they don't really need. These people can on the other hand get together enough money to hire the lens set for 3 days to shoot their short film:)

  • well put @richg101

    Not sure I agree on making them "full frame" compatible.. as it could mean some very excessive bulk – but you have some very good points. Personally I have no intention of owning a set of anamorphic primes or buying an adapter that I normally won´t be able to use on set anyway and as it´s a specialized aesthetic which I might as well rent when I need it. If it´s affordable in rental terms (4-5k a lens) it will be widely available.

    But then it has to be worth the trouble of renting it - in other words, functionality needs to be top notch along with some very interesting characteristics.. If it comes with a standard PL mount + high quality adapters to other mounts – all the better.

  • @srlmagic would still cost a lot cost-effectively copy LOMO lenses?

  • When Panasonic supports 4:3 native recording, it'll be interesting to have 2x anamorphic single focus lens.

  • The super-pronounced, oval bokeh is generally reserved for CUs and ECU. This can be done with 1.33X by stacking CU diopters, which you'll likely need to have in any case if you want to shoot a cinematic narrative project.

    In a lot of cases, in the clips I see, folks generally don't use anything close to a proper taking lens for CUs on their Century and Pany taking lenses anyhow, either because they don't know what they should be using or just don't have the proper lens in their kit yet. Proper cinema CUs are often done well above 100mm (Primos tap out at 100mm but the C-Series, the more popular and more widely preferred set of classic anamorphic lenses, goes all the way to 180mm). 75mm is quite common though for a conservative looking CU.

    An exception here would be filmmakers like John McTiernan or Wes Anderson who specifically like the distortion you introduce to people's faces when you shoot CUs with a normal or wide-angle lens.

    Better looking CUs, on average, with several of the other adapters is at least partially influenced by the simple fact that almost all but the 1.33X adapters by default force the user into operating at the shallow end of telephoto lenses to avoid vignetting. It's not the only factor but it's one that cannot be ignored.

    There are definite gotchas with anamorphic but they're never the choice because it's faster or easier than spherical. Also, many of the reported issues with the 1.33X adapters are magnifications of issues present in the taking lens. The better the taking lens the better your anamorphic footage is likely to be. All the horror stories I'd read I never expected to be able to get usable footage below f/2 even with my doublet but on the best lens I have, my 35mm Nikkor, I can shoot it wide open at f/1.4 and the only really noticeable issue is inherent in the Nikkor itself at this stop, shooting on a normal 35mm SLR, and consistent with the review of this lens at Ken Rockwell's exhaustive Nikon site.

    Just to offer an alternate, glass is half-full or better perspective. Also, 4-perf anamorphic 35mm uses an aperture of 21mm, very close to the GH2's 19mm width (in 16x9 mode) where S35 is 24.89mm. Hopefully we'll get a 4:3 native mode one of these days.

  • Oh, and oval bokeh and horizontal flares are the dessert, not the main course, with anamorphic. Folks that don't get that should just save their money and buy the Vid Atlantic lens filter and be happy.

  • I couldn't agree more @BurnetRhoades

    The flare thing is such a small part of the anamorphic story and usually better avoided. And the oval Bokeh is the same. Only part of the Anamophic "look".

    It's a beautiful distortion that can't be predicted and is especially precious in the clean and clinical modern digital cameras that have no personaility.

    JB.

  • Agreed. Unless I'm looking at 5Dmkii footage, and the specific aesthetic that FF offers, non-anamorphic footage just feels so claustrophobic, usually.

Start New Topic

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google Sign In with OpenID

Sign In Register as New User

Tags in Topic

Top Posters