Or the 4k studio version? Seems to have gone very quiet on these cams, despite how nice a global version of the pocket would be. Apparently the camera are shipping soon and I expected to see some test footage to coincide..?
If you can't see the way the lenses render the defocus then you're blind. Even with the rather deep field at the wider end, it's plain to see that the lenses are defocusing with the 2x anamorphic distortion as well as adding the classical anamorphic aesthetic. And seeing as you are being so harsh and demanding of the lenses and of Hugo's test, as well as quite pompous, please direct us to some work of yours which illustrates your experience with anamorphic lenses in general, as well as the work you'd produce if SLR Magic had infact made lenses that matched Panavision c's or Vantage 74's.
Normally you'd be preaching to the choir. This time you're IMO plain wrong. I can't imagine anything else that could make the gh4 4;3 mode look more anamorphic. This looks more 'anamorphic' than most of the stuff I've seen from Hugo - including what he's shot on his Kowa B+H. if Hugo had aimed the light in the background towards the lens it would have flared more. instead he used the light to add some edge light to her to make her pop a bit more. I'm not saying I love the optical quality, but I can certainly see some anamorphic beauty there. The lenses have shaped the way Hugo has shot the piece. He'd have shot it completely differently and it would have looked completely different if he'd used normal lenses and cropped.
The comments so far seem very harsh. Admittedly you could give Hugo a 550d and a 18-55 kit lens and he'd make something beautiful with it. Add some artistic themes, a great soundtrack and a truly beautiful lady in a semi transparent top into the mix and as a sexist pig I'm gonna like it.
Optically it looks like these lenses were being used in their sweet spot in terms of a scene. subdued light, little opportunity for edge CA to become apparent. I see the classic SLR Magic browny orange/blue CA mix going on which to me is undesirable. LOMO's do CA properly. In a lomo square you get CA which doesnt cause a harsh effect. These look like they may suffer from the typical SLR magic CA which to me isn't nice. Positive thoughts are that these lenses really look anamorphic. subdued flares are nice, nice defocus, barrel distortion isn;t too corrected (barrel distortion is one of the best features of anamorphics from yesteryear). On a wide shot it draws your eye into the centre, and reminds the viewer they're watching a cinemascope movie. The sheer number of elements in the optical pathway are showing themselves really nicely. I'd still rather grab a rama 36, a tokina and a set of cheap 50, 85 and 135 lenses and shoot full frame 16:9, with 3 times the sensor area, and 3 times the shallowness of dof, with almost no CA, the perfect amount of distortion, and a German badge from 1970 on the front rather than a 2015 Chinese badge.
Fixed EF mount is a disastrous choice. Infact the lack of m4/3 mount option from RED and BM on their Ursa is a mystery as well. When you give users the ability to stick a SB ultra or SB XL on the camera you open up vast cost effective optical options. A m4/3 to PL / oct19, oct19, etc etc adaptor would also allow use of cheap LOMO s35mm primes.
Exactly the same mistake BM made with the first cinema camera EF version. Everyone wanted m4/3!
One of the main problems with the Mitchell mount lenses is that they're on the checklist for just about every camera rental house lens tech and high end owner operator. The fact that the B+L lenses were used on the Godfather has made them a desirable investment for hire outs. The reason they're so desired is that they were made in fewer numbers and using less refined manufacturing processes than the options available from Zeiss. Being American made they will have been the first choice for patriotic America DOP's, and as such the golden age of Hollywood was captured on such lenses. For every set of Super Baltars there are about 20 sets of Mk1 Zeiss. The rarity and their heritage mean they're worth the investment for lens techs to buy up for the extortionate prices asked of late because they can rehouse them into more durable mechanics and rent them as a special item. For this reason, they might come up for sale, but they always fetch huge sums making them almost as hard to acquire as a set of Pannys. The closest and cheapest way to get similar characteristics to Baltars is to look for the original Helios -44. A silver unit with bronze coatings. Most have ghastly purple/blue coatings but some can be found in a very early single coating
I've said it once, and I'll say it again. I'd happily eat my 55mm/1.2 olympus lens (which measures radioactivity due to its thorium content). Someone send over some money to replace the lens and I'll film myself eating each element for all to see.
unfortunately the ff38 has a rear element clear aperture of 36mm, So puts some limitation on its use with anamorphic lenses.
the ff38 has been designed to fulfil near transparent afocal optical performance when used on a 36mmx24mm sensor area on a 58mm/f2 aperture. Being over engineered it does infact cope with as wide as 50mm,f1.4 apertures without significant light transmission loss or vignette on 36x24mm sensors.
50mm taking lens plus a 2x ana on 36mm sensor width cropped tp 2.4/1 is approximately similar to a 35mm spherical taking lens on a 36mm wide sensor area cropped to 2.4/1, so using a ff38 on the front will likely produce vingette too harsh to make the expense and extra weight/length worthwhile. I'd played around with making scaled up ff38's with 50mm rear elements but 95% of users don't realised or value how hard it is to manufacture a wa attachmant that does what the ff38 does, and as such a £500-600 price point aint viable
It does seem that the actual gap between this ($30,000) and the A7Smk1 (currently $1500 to buy new) is small. Their footage doesnt look very good. Their lens mount is a hindrance since it limits the use of specialist lenses with short back focus distances.
The actual industrial design is rather nice though, and I imagine this will do very well with underwater shooters who can't live with the pitfalls of the a7s. This could infact be the perfect match for FORBES70 as it happens. Body will sit quite nicely into a slightly reworked FORBES body, and the clean look from 100,000iso will be good to combat the inherent slower lens speeds of medium format lenses.