Jump to content

Caleb Genheimer

Members
  • Content Count

    569
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Caleb Genheimer

  1. From what I’ve seen of the Aivascope 1.75X out there, almost all the footage seems to be from the original version, and I will say although I never used that version, this MKII footage looks quite a bit cleaner. It appears at the very least that the coatings were changed to something with better performance. I suspect also either better QC, more precision in the housing, or both. I will be shooting an in-depth review at some point, but all of my cameras are currently rented out indefinitely for one of my regular client’s live-streaming needs until virus restrictions change, which will be who knows when. I don’t honestly know what it would cover FOV-wise in such a large sensor. On my BMPCC4K, it definitely clears 24mm, which is on par with the Kowa, and my Kowa won’t even manage that unless I use a massive variable diopter like the FVD-35. If I had a 22mm, I suspect it would cover with that as well, but some of that incremental focal length minutia gets deceptive with anamorphic adapters. There might be a taking lens that works well with it on medium format, but the diameter of the rear glass will be restrictive. There is certainly some measure of maths that can be done to get an idea of where to start, but in my experience, you can crunch numbers on crop factors, sensor sizes, equivalencies, aspect ratios, etc. backwards and forwards... at the end of the day, you need glass and camera in hand to test the setup for compatibility. It is likely that in theory, it works at or just eider than “normal” focal length (50mm FF equiv.,) regardless of the format. Outside of a handful of the highly sought after lenses, this is as wide as it gets for adapters 1.5X and above. The vast majority (Sankor, 16-D, Schneider, Moller, etc.) start at the long end, 58-85mm. The Aivascope 1.75X is, however, adequately sized to cover almost any lens I would get for my 16mm camera. I just need focus marks added to the Focuser-8 so I can use tape and nail proper focus reliably.
  2. Andrew... get your hands on an Aivascope 1.75X MK2 (or wait for the MK3), it’s a freaking BEAST. I wouldn’t say it kicks my tunes Kowa 16-H straight in the crotch, but it sure as heck kicks it in the shins a bit. I got mine with a single focus on front for under US$800, after seeing the image it feels like highway robbery. It’s as wide as my Kowa. Anyone who’s been around the anamorphic block for a decade or so will grasp the weight of that statement.
  3. I have to say, so far my Aivascope 1.75X MKII/Focuser-8 combo is performing in a manner that has me considering it as being criminally underrated. I know it’s not an Iscorama “clone” AFAIK, but their 1.5X I would assume is just as good as their other lens. I’m grabbing the Aivascope instead of my Kowa 16-H these days, and that’s saying something. Im laying low for a couple more years. Vazen is on the verge of greatness... the 40mm was a good foray, but the revised focus method in the 28mm is on par with other anamorphics that have significantly higher price tags. If they can do a S35 line of lenses with those mechanics, it will be tough to say no. They do need to take Andrew’s advice on coatings though. Their lenses render a bit modern to my eyes. I think it’s a coating/color/contrast issue. The optical rendering (bokeh etc) is very pleasing.
  4. For anyone curious, here’s an update: Aivascope 1.75X MKII on 16mm. Make sure your variable diopter has focus marks, or you’ll end up with some blurry shots like I did 😬
  5. Here’s my latest anamorphic adventure! Pro-tip for anyone who is considering an anamorphic rig on film: make sure your variable diopter has focus marks! Everything looked focused in the viewfinder, but it definitely wasn’t. Marks and a tape measure are your best friends.
  6. I just want a board sensor that covers 16mm and has dual pixel AF so I can hack my 16mm camera apart and replace the ground glass with a CMOS and have reliable AF on a film camera.
  7. Bummer that there’s no full sensor height Anamorphic mode. Looks like even the “full” frame mode isn’t FULL frame.
  8. And here I am Sheltered in Place spending my money and time on 400’ rolls of Kodak 😂 But seriously. If Canon can (as it appears they’re claiming to) get these non cropped high res/high framerate modes working in the R5 alongside their autofocus, they’re essentially back on top. Still nobody can touch their AF. It’s been allllll the other crap that they suck at.
  9. Good to know! All of my cameras are currently in use at a client’s studio, so I don’t have any way of testing these currently.
  10. This is a Superscope, an RKO prism anamorphic from the mid-1950s when many systems flashed in the pan of development. There’s something really satisfying about actually snagging TWO of these for $150, and having them show up in their original boxes complete with Superscope red font box tape, and a manual still in the envelope it was originally mailed out in, post-stamped from my home state of Minnesota. Based on the pictures, I was rather worried about fungus, but they opened up easily, and are cleaning up to look brand new, a new coat of crinkle paint being the only needed exception. According to the manual, they’re good from 75mm and up (on 35mm), and can vary squeeze from 1X to 3X. There’s an additional micro adjustment screw for dialing in even squeeze across the image. Seeing as these have no focus control, I’m interested to test wether they can handle focus through, and perhaps sacrifice one as an optics donor for a more camera-friendly re-house. If all else fails, they’re quite stunning as-is, and a slice of cinema history for the bookshelf. If anyone has experience with prism anamorphics, please chime in!
  11. That video is fantastic! I’m definitely going to be on the hunt for this 1.75X Kowa now. Seems like a real winner that I’d sell my other scopes to get ahold of. I’m FLOORED that more people aren’t talking about the 1.75X Aivascope though. Just the fact that it is currently produced for the anamorphic market and that it goes so wide and is so small is crazy. There’s very little out there and most of it seems to be about his initial lens, but this Version 2 seems very sharp with good rendering.
  12. Cool, thanks! I saw your vid out there, it seemed like a prime example from someone who rigged it up properly. If you are ever considering parting with another one, I have a good home for it. Currently getting the ball rolling on my 16mm camera with the Aivascope which is also one of the best pieces of glass I’ve found, except for the fact that it it is a “baby” type scope so it may limit taking lens choices. It seems to support the same FOV taking lens as a 16-H, possibly even a touch wider. Both can truly cover a standard set of primes on any format, which is rare on the wide end for high squeeze factor adapter anamorphics. I’m close I think to having my 16mm camera adapted to take Micro 4/3 glass, and my calculations tell me I should be able to use both the Aivascope and the 16-H on that format with the Voightlander set from 17.5-42.5mm (so excluding the 10.5mm.) The center image on those lenses is excellent, even wide open, so on 16mm they will look fantastic. But the large front elements might not play so well with the baby scope.
  13. Anyone used one? Have one? I’m on a 1.75X journey right now with an Aivascope, but there’s still something about my Kowa 16-H. Wondering if the “Inflight” 1.75X might be a middle ground. I’ve heard rumors that the mechanics are not as robust as some might like.
  14. Autofocus keeps me from the S1H, Open agate from the Sigma FP. I don’t mind the Sigma FP not having amazing autofocus considering the price, but I’m dead set on my next cam being full frame open gate.
  15. This past year, I’ve had a HUGE personal revelation concerning digital cameras. Firstly, the Pocket 4K has opened my eyes to the image quality and flexibility that is missing in any camera that lacks RAW or near-raw codec options. It really is a sticking point for me at this juncture, and sets apart what I would trust as a professional tool from what is prosumer. I just don’t want that uncertainty about quality during production. Secondly, I recently got a 16mm camera, and there’s still in 2020 NOTHING digital that can touch real film. There’s just not. The nuance in color, detail, highlight retention, everything... it is simply unmatched. Only ARRI gets anywhere near the ballpark. The myriad of other cameras, even cinema cameras, are of course capable of producing beautiful images, but they don’t come out of the gate like ARRI does. That first test roll of Vision3 500T scanned you an SSD full on blew my mind, and I was going into it expecting to be impressed. Now, instead of obsessing over which new multi-thousand dollar digital camera body I should commit to for the next four or so years, I’m obsessing over what I might shoot on a few thousand dollars of celluloid this year. IMO everyone should shoot film once. Honestly, 16mm cameras are not terribly expensive, even good ones with crystal sync and quiet operation for sound recording compatibility. Excluding getting your own, many rental houses still have SRs just sitting around, and will rent them out for very reasonable rates. Kodak has labs all over the place, most of them staffed by wonderful and helpful people. Obviously, there’s no permanent replacement for the convenience of digital cameras in the modern content creation environment, but film is also a more viable and accessible option for the occasional project than most people realize... and as more people use it, it will be more likely to stay alive and well. Using film re-adjusted the way that I shoot digitally as well.
  16. You say the Leica is almost a dead ringer for Alexa, eh? That’s a pretty hefty claim considering the Arri’s now decade-long reign at the throne of digital motion picture sensors. I’d be genuinely interested in a breakdown of the Leica’s latitude and highlight handling, as I think those are the aspects of Arri’s image which competitors still fall short on. It is possible to re-map densities, colors, and tailor denoise/sharpening appropriately to get close to Arri’s look from any high quality camera file these days, but if the latitude and roll-off are not attainable at the sensor-level, the end result still falls notably short. I am beginning to lose faith that any of the current manufacturers will ever truly crack that egg. At this point for me to ditch just sticking with my oh-so-affordable Pocket 4K, one of them would have to make an Alexa-competitive full-frame camera with DPAF, in the sub-$4K range. That S1H is so close, but the AF is once again a crying shame... if the Leica truly is knocking at Arri’s door as a full-frame 10-bit camera, color me EXTREMELY tempted. That would make it the Poor Man’s Mini LF, which is a huge deal even without good AF. If Metabones would get off their butts and make an L-Mount to Medium Format Speed Booster, I’d be into one of the new Panny/Sigma/Leica bodies in a heartbeat. Ive been looking at the Kipon Baveyes, but apparently it has some distortion, which makes it a zero-sum-gain IMO. At that point, may as well use faster full-frame glass.
  17. I would die happy if they would go in the opposite direction: 16mm coverage. There are many wonderful 16mm film cameras not being used because it is costly and/or impractical to convert them to the coveted Super-16 format, but 1.8X anamorphic and “Regular-16” would be a match made in heaven! Their 28/40/65 already cover the format, they could just do a wider lens for 16mm specifically, and re-house the other three lenses in PL mount. I’m scheming regardless to get that 28mm onto my Eclair NPR, but it would be preferable to have a wider option. I would think they could do it with the anamorphic optics from the 28mm and a new spherical block designed around the smaller 16mm image circle.
  18. Kowa. Sankor. Elmo. There are many good options, it doesn’t have to be “for 8mm”, any 16mm or even 35mm scope will work as well. ebay is great, expect to pay about $400 for a decent scope these days.
  19. I’m REALLY crossing fingers hard for a “Pro” version of the Aivascope 1.75X lens some time soon. Heck, I’d buy 3 or 4 and make myself a set of anamorphic primes!
  20. I STILL feel 99% confident that an oval aperture blade system would be relatively easy to implement. Why 1.33X lens makers haven’t tried this I have no idea. If they hate the concept of loosing light, the final stops of the aperture can just open the sides up to a spherical opening for max T-stop. On digital? It’s past time to trick out my Kowa 16-H and call it a day. Probably a FVD-35 for maximum width. I’m eyeing up the Z-Cam F6 with a Kipon Baveyes for near IMAX size sensor emulation. On film, I’m starting in next year with a (regular) 16mm camera, and I’m hoping that Aivascope does another run of the 1.75X lenses, as that stretches out regular-16mm to be basically bang-on 2.39:1 with no waste. I may even buy 3, pair them with taking lenses and variable diopters to make a 3 lens set, possibly rehoused. The only way I’d ever touch a 1.33X lens would be if it gave a significant wide angle advantage over the Kowa with similar optical quality... which is not an easy metric to beat. Technically the Letus does, I think? But then it’s double focus. 1.33X at 50mm is a safe (if not THE safest) place to start with budget all-in-one anamorphic, so I don’t blame them, but I’m also not very enthused. If they pull off a 25mm, I’ll jump on board in a heartbeat (especially if it is easy to open up and modify with an oval insert) Otherwise for personal fun stuff, the projection adapters still give more character and quality... and if I end up in a more critical situation? Well, there’s an excellent set of Cine Kowas around town that I could just rent.
  21. I’m unclear on how this doesn’t encompass BlackMagic’s BMRAW.... glad that it (apparently) doesn’t? But yeah. BMRAW REALLY needs to start permeating/spreading, or we’re screwed. There has to be viable competition, or the tech will remain artificially out of reach. All things considered, IMO RED has some borderline douchey business practices/models across the board. I don’t doubt the validity of their innovation in this instance, nor the right for them to do business as they see fit (or for people to buy into the hype), but it’s 110% not for me. I’ve worked RED footage in post, and believe me, the reason they’ve defended this tech tooth and nail is that it’s the only thing they have going. Any pro body sensor from the last 5 years would match or even obliterate what I saw out of the RED in terms of noise, sensitivity, dynamic range and color fidelity. That’s not to say the RED was bad... it was good footage, especially in compressed RAW. But ARRI still whoops their (and everyone else’s) butt up and down the street, even in ProRes. I really hope Kinefinity is joined in making RED-adjacent cameras, because there is an ergonomic sensibility to the brick/brain design. Even ARRI has been pushed into making the “mini” variants for this reason. I’d love to se a Panny EVA-2 with the S1H sensor, in a brick body, with BMRAW licensed under the hood.
  22. @Andrew Reid What kind of DR are you seeing compared to the S1H? I’m patiently waiting still for someone to break that Alexa barrier of 14+ stops, but even with RAW becoming pedestrian in the last few years, no camera does yet. The S1H is now a Netflix certified A-camera, which means it is very good... but it still sits right in that 12-ish stop plateau where most all cameras sit (even if it’s a very high quality 12 stop image.) Do you think there’s any chance of a full sensor height 3:2 readout on the Sigma similar to the S1H 6K mode? If you’re in contact with Sigma, put that bug in their ear for sure.
×
×
  • Create New...