@Psyco Back when image quality was strongly limited by film MTF you could make a valid argument that a rear anamorphic could improve image quality by using a bigger piece of film. This is no longer the case with high performance digital sensors. Now, the only reason for using anamorphic is to achieve anamorphic character. Unfortunately, rear anamorphic adapters have no such character, so they are basically useless. You're better off using a good spherical lens and cropping to the desired aspect ratio.

Testing "near" focus.

Now the same anamorphic SLRMagic adapter using the Sony A6500:

From the street crime video it doesn't appear to flare at all. A 1.33x adapter without even flare seems... Unnecessary?

I much prefer the 2x look.

@kristoferman You have to be kidding. There are horizontal blue flares all over the crime video. Look again, especially at the police scenes. And flares are not the only reason (perhaps the least) to like anamorphic looks.

I learned.... if there's content, how good the image matters alot less. I've never shot any adapters that didn't soften the image. And flares are great. All aesthetic blemishes add to the experience.

Upon second watch on a larger screen, I definitely do see the flares. It doesn't look bad or anything, it looks pretty good! I'm just partial to the 2x look even on 16:9 footage.

I'm gonna post some of my anamorphic test footage here soon with a cinelux and the FM single focus adapter. It's a pretty good combo except it barely flares at all. Still nice and sharp though.

Nice videos markr041, great job.

@markr041 .....FTP....fuckthepopulation. It's a brand name !

@endotoxic ....did u watch Mark's video...or do the images just pass directly to your asshole w/o any thought processing whatsoever ? I was commenting on content. Watch the video again. "stolen lands ftp " except ftp is a brand name ...https://fuckthepopulation.com/ ...or maybe they're talking about files lol. But if u google ftp, on the first page...

Kitty, sorry, @kurth I’m sorry I love you, i Learn a lot from you and vitaliy

A diferente approach about cellphones and film.

From my point of view, I took about 1863 years to make the first mass produced pencil. Maybe to 1930 to make oil paintings and canvas massively available, for the people, as well to photography, in a massive way too , you know, new materials for new colors, and substrates for rolls of films.

Michael Angelo, Picasso, Caravaggio, all those masters, made paintings and sometimes even more. But their work was make as a though process, and mainly made people feel, and as a result sometimes critic because it made you think, thus creating what is called culture. Nothing new here nothing.

It took 1600 years to master light in painting, 260 years more for make massive pencil available and other tech, then 130 to make film massively, then what?...60 years later availability of handy cams, and 20 years later almost half population has cellphone and 8 years more, everyone has a video camera photo camera, and an intelligent one.

Big big grand masters of cinema will come from this generation, now we will and can say in a few years for the real first time, everything has been filmed and tried. There are new forms of cinema, new techcnics, new narratives and styles. Film, and classic cinema as I call it was the foundation of what we are to come, it’s a transitional point in where we are struggling with our own life’s more than ever, wait more, and it will come.

As a director I understand what limitations we have, but as a visionary I only can embrace and spect grate things to come for humanity in this aspect.

Can you imagine, all the videos the right kid will see now, all the grate now and then movies he will see all the shot content he will compare and then use his cell phone and tools available as an app and make a 4K quality 60fps masterpieces at the age of 12 with his friends?

As Beethoven all young kids that are handled the right tools thrives and glows if they have the talent.

We are in the starting point now, not only any human can acces a pencil, paint, now a phone, with a camera. I see, film was is and will be grate, all time grate, but it’s by it low volume and cost it’s already done. Digital came to stay and now every hand with balls and will, can access one camera phone, and make what only 9 year before was only posible with dslr, that only 9 years before was possible with 120k dollars Alexa type cameras.

Im 38, never used film, I only can dream to acces it, maybe never will I live far away from it, but cellphones here in Perú are making a difference. Me and you can see the cultural impact, like it or not, content is the new dad, a bad example dad maybe, it may spawn bad children, but also some genius ones, the ones tha Kubrick would be proud to see grown

Kubrick was born in the right time, I see a lot of talent lately. I think the new masters have 10, maybe 6 years old right now, and they will use VR sets and use 100 sensors in a 3D eviroment and live raytracing with AI recognition of actors and auto makeup and dynamic virtual light over captured 3D real image... crazy shit will be to be a director in the future , all you must learn and understand before even trying these new paradigms of cinema what a level of vision will be needed to see and understand and make the new masterpieces.

I’m exited, understandably sad for not even touching a film canister in my life , but happy that I made it making content, a lot of shitty ones, give my family support and live a respectable life after all.

So... it’s a wide spectrum but a good one in my perspective to have lots of cameras around for people, more can now paint and draw, new Warhol’s and basquiat’s are coming and I’m exited, not all is classic painting, not all is Tarkovsky or Kurosawa.