SLR Magic ANAMORPHOT 1,33X 50

MikeLinn

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11663/sample-footage-shot-slr-magic-anamorphot

endotoxic

i would like to see the results on more common lenses, also on the inexpensive and excellent rokinon cine lenses, which by now have a good user base around the world.

kholi

@endotoxic

I shot with the Anamorphot (not this version) + Sigma 18-35 + Pocket RAW few months ago...

I think it's a common lens, and the combo is pretty nice.

endotoxic

@kholi

The only thing i dont see is oval bokeh, i think that only comes with full anamorphic lens. What i find interesting is the way i have associated anamorphic footage . i im used to see more texture and this adapter shure has not fullfill this FOR ME . It is a very clinical piece of glass. Im not saying go for distortion go for aberrations, but from my point of view, part of the bended glass, is the bended results coming from it, and try to fix that is kind of going the other way of the natural alias produced by it.

vicharris

@endotoxic

It does have oval bokeh when you use a diopter. If have footage somewhere on this site with screen grab examples.

samsara · Capture d’écran 2013-12-11 à 17.47.24.png

voilà

kellar42

So weird that this is looking better than the Letus. Looks like it's working on all kinds of taking lenses, too, though I understand SLR Magic can only guarantee their own. I'd love to see this tested on a Lumix 12-35, 35-100 and 20mm Pancake and GH3...if that works I'm buying one.

vicharris · Screen Shot 2013-10-28 at 10.35.01 AM.png

Found one. Look to the right of the flowers, right above the railing :)

vicharris · Screen Shot 2013-10-27 at 8.56.52 PM.png

Here's a few more grabs I had on my desktop. All shit with the Pocket Cam. Some of these are with the Voight 17.5 but can't remember which ones.

endotoxic

That bokeh is not that oval. I dont wanna be the bad guy here. Only advantage i see here is the real aspect ratio. That being said, im not impresed by its character. Yes its Sharp, but too clinical, even its lfares are too perfect lols.

kholi

@endotoxic

I know what you mean about the overall look. The adapter may not be for everyone. I sent you a message.

vicharris

@endotoxic

Please show us then, this oval bokeh

I just googled it and every image that came up, even from some panavision labeled stuff looks like that.

kholi

He wants to see this:

http://www.apnatimepass.com/killing-them-softly-movie-photo-24.jpg

vicharris

Is that the right frame @kholi? Am I supposed to look at the raindrops on the back of the windshield? I've seen the other grab you've posted from this movie and what lenses were used on this movie?

I guess I'm just tired of hearing people bitch about a cheap lens and compare it to $50,000 pieces of glass.

kholi

It should be one of a car interior.

Raindrops/bokeh's Oval from the 2x stretch. I'm pretty confident that's a Panaovision lens, just by the twisted frame.

I thin kit's mostly that they are comparing anamorphic looks, because you can get similar to that Panavision with cheaper adapters (I saw a 2x one go recently, Lomo Foton-A... 3,000 though!). Before I used the SLR "briefly" i considered that 1.33x was not enough.

With some adjusting and creativity I do think it can get there?

vicharris

Yep, it's a G series lens.

As for the oval stuff, I shot some other stuff that was really oval and a lot more of it but because Andrew wasn't over my shoulder, holding my hand, I kind of screwed up the focusing a bit. No need to show stuff like that on forums. I get some of the stretching and other characteristics people are looking for but at some point, there has to be an understanding of what will be expected from something like this.

The "It doesn't look as good as Bladerunner" type comments are just insane in my mind.

kevin_kirchman · Screen shot 2013-12-11 at 10.40.29 PM.png

I'm with @vicharris on this one. Expecting to get 10's of thousands of dollars worth of performance in a sub $1000 adapter isn't rational.

However, this is one shot that sticks out in my head as a definitive Anamorphic "Oval bokeh" shot. I bet if a similar set-up was used with the adapter, it could get comparable bokeh.

endotoxic

no one has ever mention anything about apples vs oranges. For me, only me, its too well made that it lacks character.

What??

yes, character is about the way you behave, and this little bastard has 1 year old and behaves like it was 30. Too sharp for me. About the oval bokeh its also a personal taste how it behaves me don't like. Why? wont say cos it will bring flame to the already damaged thread.

Aria

Meh! Looks good to me and especially the fact that it is so sharp and clean. It allows me to choose to get whatever look I want with different taking lenses and post treatment. i'm not that fond of an anamorphic adapter that has so much "character" that it's no longer flexible. This adapter kind of stays out of the way a bit, which can be a plus. It gives just enough of the things you want in an anamorphic, but not over done so that you end up limited in it's use cuz it always looks the same. I see it as an advantage.

endotoxic

@aria has some strong good points about its flexibility.

kholi

In my case I actually don't need any adapters... I have a set of anamorphics that I use when I really want to shoot.

The bigger deal is having run and gun, because the Kowas need a Mattebox and with a mattebox comes filters etc. I literally want to just use my Hoya ProNDs, a lends hood, and a zoom -- go and shoot.

So I agree with @Aria as well, and that's a big reason why I want to the SLR.

vicharris

@kholi

Were you able to get any good oval bokeh stuff when you tested it? Using that diopter Andrew had really helped and I know they were making a much better one than the one we used. It was just to show what the lens could do. Really wish I would of had a day to play with it and get the focusing down. I'm sure it's easy once you know what to do but we were pressed since we had a meeting as well.

kholi

@vicharris

It's more so that people want to get the anamorphic traits without having to shoot up close just to throw backgrounds out. A diopter just lets you shoot closer to subject, 2X would give you the anamorphic traits if anything at all's out of focus (for the most part).

I'll go ahead and say this, and hopefully not cause any issues... when the adapter and Andrew came my way for that afternoon I had already been shooting with an Oval Insert within the Kipon adapter. So when the Anamorphic adapter went on, I had Oval Bokeh (not perfect, but close). He was aware that I had it in, and I tested with it in and out.

When applying that "creative" outlook, and with the Sigma 18-35, it was enough for me to say hell yes. But, I'm also not above trying things out, some people will be.

I don't view it any differently than adding a speedbooster to get a wider field of view, or using clamps to try and cobble together some other anamorphic. I would rather have someone dye-cut or laser cut a set of various apertures and anamorphic bokeh, use those in the Kipon adapter or another adapter, than have to fiddle with clamps.

So, again, I did this on my own and I know that it works and works well... others mileage may vary, as someone that actually shoots with larger, anamorphic primes, I think this is a really good alternative with or without the oval bokeh insert.

That's why I'm getting one.

kholi

I should add that it's not the exact same look as a 2X, but it is better than cropping, to me. That's my POV and of course everyone's entitled to their own!

Aria

@kholi, may I ask which Oval Bokeh insert you were using? I'm glad you posted this cuz I wasn't sure that it would actually work when used behind an Anamorphic Adapter. This just opens up even more options :)

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters