@stip

type '>' (without quotes) then simply copy - paste the text you want to quote.

Thanks!

@WashingtonIrving It's POINTLESS to make it in PL mount.

There is only one full height sensor camera right now that can shoot with it, the Alexa Studio.

A regular vanilla Alexa, RED, EPIC, F3, BMCC WON"T work with 2X without a substantial and pointless crop.

jb

@LPowell

Aren't we talking about an actual anamorphic LENS not an adaptor?

I've shot extensively with 1.3X and 2X anamorphics. The 1.3X is more subtle for sure, but it's the best way to optimise the FOV for the MAJORITY of sensors being used with the camera.

The more cameras this can work on, the more viable the lenses will be for those seeking to commercialise them.

More people use 1.78 sensor cameras than any other.

A 1.5X LENS is an orphan format being deisgned to cover a compromise for another adaptor ? That's what you're arguing for.

It's better to have a lens, not an adaptor, and one that's optimised for the target sensor size.

Ideally of course, just like the Hawks, you have the option for either 1.3X and 2X.

jb

@johnbrawley No, I'm not talking about anamorphic lenses, I was responding to your comments about "1.5X anamorphic adaptors". I've got too many lenses as it is, and couldn't justify investing in a set of fast anamorphic primes as well. I've used both 1.33x and 1.5x anamorphic adapters, and found the post-production workflow to be pretty much the same. With the GH2 in 1080p24 mode, both 1.33x and 1.5x require stretching and cropping in post. I prefer the 1.5x because the anamorphic effects are more dramatic and the ISCO image quality is so seductive.

@LPowell

Please do not worry about 1.33X being blurry on edges and need to be stretched to cut out blurry edges. Many here are using Anamorphic adapters NOT designed for use on mFT sensor so there is this problem. The are designed for something like 1/3" sensors. Isco anamorphic is good on 4/3 sensor because they were designed for 36x24mm sensors to begin with and has nothing to do with 1.5X with best image quality.

@slrmagic

Hi Andrew.

Yes I guess I'm rounding off 1.33x

2X work perfectly well on all cameras, you're just CROPPING a great deal of the image though when you use 2X anamorphic on cameras that only have 1.78 sensors.

To me the whole advantage and point of Anamorphic is to optically compress the image onto the sensor. If you're cropping half the image, all you're left with is a sort of anamorphic veil without really putting all that optical resolution on the sensor.

I know many LOVE the flares, but to me the really beauty of anamorphic is that you're optically increasing the resolution whilst at the same time, introducing beautiful optical imperfections that interact with the subject in random and unexpected ways.

I would personally buy a set of Anamorphic primes if they were priced the same as compact primes or a little more.

I was hoping Zeiss might have done something like a CP version in Anamorphic. Instead they've gone for MASTERPRIME prices. And only 2X as well.

I would prefer them to be 1.33X and cover at least super 35.

Perhaps offer 2X if it's easy to do so as well, but I think if I had to chosoe, 1.33X is the better choice.

I also know one other manufacturer is also planning anamorphic ZOOMS (no primes) and in 1.3X.

jb

@johnbrawley @slrmagic

Yes, I believe I said that the RED One can do full aperture 4K. It seems I was mistaken - they never implemented that feature. God knows why not - the sensor is big enough that they could crop to the correct area for standard 35mm cinema, although you'd lose pixels on either side, so it would actually end up being something like 3.5K 4:3. I seem to have assumed that since the RED will show you frame guides for 4:3, it would also record in it, but I was wrong. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if a 4:3 mode made an appearance on a future RED camera or firmware, though, seeing as it's still the format that many directors and studios prefer.

Probably RED's intention was for people just to use the sensor's native 2.4:1 mode in lieu of anamorphic lenses, which makes a certain amount of sense if you forget that people like the look of anamorphic glass.

It would seem then that the only camera system that could make use of a 2x anamophic is micro four thirds.

If there are affordable 2x anamorphic lenses out there, how long before the BMC and other cameras have a 4:3 mode?? Not many cameras have a 4:3 mode now, but that's because the price of the lenses used doesn't match with the quality of the cameras used by most of the people interested in these lenses. For example, if you're renting Hawk 1.33x lenses, then you're probably not shooting on a Gh2. Bring those lenses to people who use sub $10k cameras and surely the pressure would be on camera companies to implement a 4:3 mode. Sooner or later it will be there.

However, my reasoning for wanting a 2x is because they look better. True anamorphic. But if you can get that look in a 1.33x... well that may be the way to go.

@johnbrawley

I guess it depends on whether the sensor is a full 4:3 or it just has a 4:3 windowed mode.

I mean, the BMC is ideal because it has extra vertical area that allows a 2x to use the entire sensor. But other cameras could simply use a 4:3 window.

For Example, if you use a 1.33x on an f3 you get an image with roughly a 2.35:1 aspect ratio with a vertical height of 1080px. Now if you use a 2x anamorphic lens on the f3, and the f3 has a 4:3 window mode, the end result is exactly the same right? you get a roughly 2.35:1 image with a height of 1080px. I may be missing something here, but if 1.33x on a 16:9 sensor is OK, then why not 2x on a 16:9 sensor windowed to 4:3?

If the result is the same, and all the anamorphic goodness is in the 2x lenses (more so than the 1.33x) then I don't see the need for 1.33 lenses.

I would argue that a 4:3 recording mode on a 16:9 sensor is not out of the question for many camera manufacturers to implement.

ps. I hope I'm coming across as good natured here. Big fan of your John, loving Puberty Blues too. Top work that.

Hi folks,

I spent the sunday studying specifications of many m4/3 lenses and also some sony, canon and nikon aps lenses.

Also i did some careful tests with a camcorder and some grinded lenses i have from the 35mm adapter times. I used a camcorder to test because its macro function helps a lot to do tests and develop the lenses design.

What i found is: there is a small chance, i repeat: SMALL CHANCE to find the lens design to make the cheap anamorphic adapter to work with the GH2 and also Sony, Canon and Nikon APS. The big challenge is to make the DSLR lens to focus the image through the anamorphic lens. The camcorders have a macro function and it allows to focus, but the DLSR lenses does not have a macro function so it is hard to find the lens design to make it work keeping it cheap. My goal is to make it cheap and good IQ, if i cant do that i will stop, or i will go on just for small camcorders like HV20 and similar/suchlike.

So I developed the design of the plastic housing, some drafts with probable changes and also some lenses design with probable changes (a total of 10 different lenses design).

I found the 1.33x is the squeeze i can do. More than this makes the DSLR focus even harder, so 1.33x is the way to go.

Another thing i do not know yet is if the DSLR will get good IQ in corners. In my tests the camcorder could do that no problem, but dslr lenses are other world... lets wait to see.

Also there will be a small amount of chromatic aberration, but please, do not worry! it will be very small, just trainded eyes will see it, and it will be easily corrected in post in most editing softwares. And after the correction you cannot tell it was there. If the adapter works i will do a tutorial about this.

About horizontal flares and oval bokeh, i did 3 different designs to try, but the main goal is to make the dslr to focus, the horizontal flares and oval bokeh will be "what the good focus design allow to get". Of course, after finding the good focus, i can try to improve the oval bokeh and the horizontal flare, but at this moment i even dont know if i will find the focus, so OB and HF is a second work.

Now it is time to go to the optical lab and plastic lab. After some years out of business in the 35mm adapter world i do not know if my old partners are still on the job. So maybe the project will stop if i do not find the old partners or new affordable price partners.

I will quote a multicoating to the lenses to improve the quality, but i will do it if i can keep it cheap.

I will repeat: the chance to work in GH2 and APS is VERY SMALL, but in HDV and AVCHD small camcorders it is 99% it will be fine.

I think i can come with news in one or two weeks...

@apefos It sounds great that you're working on your own anamorphic adapter. Do you have any test footage we could look at? I know it is only for HDV cameras at the moment, but anything will be fine.

@thadon_calico - "I might sound harsh and abrasive..."

How "professional"...