@slrmagic You really hit a beehive with your intention to make an anamorphic lens especially since Isco does not answer to any requests. Thanks for that!

Implementing an oval iris of some kind in the lens would be my take for oval bokeh regardless of the squeeze factor of the lens. actually if you don't want flares thats an "anamorphic" solution for 16:9 no crop at all.

After playing around with and looking at a lot of footage shot with various anamorphic adapters used on dslr my favourite is the Isco36, Isco42, Isco54 NON MC line combined with diopters for shorter distance focus.

The most popular Idea i think would be to make kind of a copy of the isco36 that comes also with a taking lens made by you, but that can be separated to use with other lenses. $600 price tag and it will sell like crazy.

The anamorphic shooters community wants good diopters beneath the commonly available +1 (the likes of +0.5/+0.4) this should be easy to do, I wonder why nobody does it.

@Lpowell

Sure there are many popular wides with large filter threads but I think the issue here is if there are ENOUGH good wide options, say from 58mm and below; which makes a controlled size / price adapter feasible. On the other hand, do you have any particular lens in mind which would use 72mm thread or bigger?

@slrmagic

1.8x is not a bad idea. If you can manage to do it with good IQ.

As an almost owner of a BMDCC (hurry up and deliver it BMD) I would be more interested in the lens with an EF/EF-S mount, even if it did not cover a full frame sensor .. even if It did not cover an APSC sensor .. as I could then use an EF->m4/3 for the GH2.

While I now own two GH2, I concur with @jackdoerner s35/APS-C. If it's micro4/3 mount I doubt very much that I would ever purchase.

As far as micro4/3 lenses go, I own 2 x 14mm Pannies, 2 x 14-42's and 2 x 20mm. I have no intention of buying any more .. possible exception .. I sometimes wish I had one 14-140

I think it must be possible to use prisms and make a good-quality anamorphic lens for 100-200$. I have a few Delramas and i think they give an excellent image, but you need to stop the taking lens down a lot to get decent sharpness. If someone could somehow take this idea further (The Delrama is a 60s era lens) and perfect it, i think prisms could well prove to be the more cost-effective solution and possibly give you quality on par with many anamorphic attachments out there. I say this cause there's probably a reason Schneider-Kreuznach ask astronomical prices for their anamorphics and i suspect designing an anamorphic that comes anywhere close at an affordable price, could become very difficult. The idea of using prisms is that they're easy to manufacture, cost-effective and make it easy to creating different stretch models without much complications. (The Delramas i have are 1.5x) I'd pursue it further myself, as i think this could generate a lot of interest and revenue, but i don't have the time. If you like to take a look at the Delramas i could send them to you, if you like. I don't think the concern should be with flares at all, given it's so easy to do anamorphic flares in post. Good bokeh will be necessary, though, but this is possible with prisms as well. If you care to see some footage made with the Delramas (the one on Vimeo doesn't show its true potential), i can take some. But as i said, i'm busy a lot, so i'd have to get some shooting scheduled. This video on YouTube i think is ok, but i had better results stopping down more with the Vivitar 55mm f2.8 macro :

@mobileavatar The dissatisfied customers just refers to the two beta testers that only want a refund because they do not want to have their lens serviced and they have committed to a $10,000 lens that arrived in the mail that was ordered 18 months ago. It was clear they will complain until they get the money back only. They did not want servicing at all. They were given a volunteer discount that can cover for shipping costs. It was made clear to beta testers they may have to ship the lens back for servicing so there is nothing further to discuss about that thread. In other words, everyone with positive comments were threatened off the thread and also why the tread was closed down. It was not discussion at all. Just personal attack. We do not have refunds for lenses used for 2.5 months. We only service the lens in case of a failure and the warranty for the lens in the thread was 3 years even for that beta test lens. It was clear they only want money and do not want to be using the lens as they are now sharing photos taken from their new $10,000 lens. Further, Andrew Reid has used the 50mm T0.95 lens and filmed with it. Dan Cheung has not and it says it all. I would call Dan Cheung the new Ken Rockwell in terms of lens commentary as he can review and comment on gear he has never seen or touched. The lens has proven good results on the RED Epic and Arri Alexa as well. We were working with SpaceCam on the CINE set but they now have a different company direction so that was why it was changed. Everyone else using the lens is satisfied if you read around clearly. One example is there are numerous threads here saying our 12mm T1.6 lens is a lens with adapter. However, people who own and used it knows it is not the case. Hope someone can update on that trip to Kowa USA thread.

@slrmagic Thanks for looking into this. I think you have a great product. Like Vitaliy says, I think you should aim for the best price possible, like you did with the Noktor.

@mobileavatar

Please use PM or other topic.

This is topic about specific things.

@mobileavatar Please do not add further details to what is happening. It is just like what people did at l-camera-forum where rumors started from red compound then to blue then to not using anything. The term "Loktite'd together or elements falling apart is very unclear. Firstly lens elements are not Locktite'd together. Locktite has many adhesive compounds but not for optical use. In this case it is red thread lock. The rumours are spread by people who have never used such thread lock before. Just as I mentioned earlier it is pointless to hear reviews from people who have not used something before. Is there anyone here who have used Locktite RED 271 thread lock before? Those who have knows it is more permanent than epoxy or superglue and the discussion that it just comes loose should never have happened in the first place.

Thread-Lock (please do not use a general brand Locktite term) is commonly used to secure lens mechanism together. It helps to protect parts from rust and also hold them in place even under temperature changes or vibrations. It is much more convenient to not use any thread lock than to use it as it is an extra procedure in the assembly process. I have attached a photo of a Zeiss lens using thread lock. It is only responsible to be using thread lock to assemble a lens. Asking for $$$ back because thread lock is used is not reasonable. If there is an issue they can send the lens back for service.

Feel free to send us an email to support@slrmagic.com or PM if you have further concerns as @Vitaliy_Kiselev suggested but we do not want rumours to continue to spread.

@johnnym Lens price increases with the number of elements as well as the diameter of the elements. Price also increases exponentially for glass that can make a good fast lens. An anamorphic lens has a large front diameter and need good glass for minimal light loss and that alone will not be cheap.

@JosiahSjostrom As we are a small company we can only make a small number of lenses per month. We have long delays for our lenses because we can only make enough lenses for a niche market. Anamorphic is definitely not a mass market item and that is why it has pretty much stopped production. People who have emailed us knows we are a small company and might be interested to make a niche market product and anamporhic lens was one of the suggestions.

So anyone with a good reason to go against the previously mentioned 1.8x idea that will convert 4:3 to 2.3:1 and 16:9 to 3.2:1?

@slrmagic - "So anyone with a good reason to go against the previously mentioned 1.8x idea that will convert 4:3 to 2.3:1 and 16:9 to 3.2:1?"

Two reasons I would have no use for a 1.8x anamorphic adapter:

1. There are no MFT cameras that shoot in 4:3 aspect ratio at 24fps.

2. With a 16:9 sensor, the required 3.2:1 stretch would degrade horizontal image resolution,

In my view, one of the main reasons to favor a 1.5x anamorphic is because it is interchangeable with the finest and most popular anamorphics of all time, the ISCO I.5x models. I have an ISCO Widescreen 2000 and at one time owned an ISCO 54 and they are gorgeous. The only reason I sold the ISCO 54 was because its size and weight required a custom 15mm rails mount, limiting its flexibility.