Caleb Genheimer

I shot this a couple months ago, and had a blast! It's always changing, but my anamorphic rig is getting more useable. Kowa 16-H (still amongst the best ana glass.) SLR Magic Rangefinder (could loose the blue blobs but otherwise does a great job.) RedStan Clamps (what more needs to be said? They're the best, and they're red. Makes Canon L-glass jealous.) Konica Hexanon 40mm f1.8 (this lens just works. Really well. Set to f/4 and forget.) Samsung NX1 (yeah I'm one of those guys. But this thing pays the bills, and will continue to do so for at least one more season.) EDIT: yes, the anamorphic is not perfectly aligned. That's actually on purpose to add to the vintage low-fi aesthetic.

This is mine, done with FilmConvert. I always do a curve node before the FC plugin. (Davinci Resolve). I like that FC wrangles the color away from a digital look, and adds some grain when needed. You've still gotta pick which film stock though, and massage the clip with some curves/levels. There's no true magic bullet solution to grading, and no substitute for a careful eye.

Do NXL Dumb adapters ship regardless? Or only if the full goal is met? Why are the earlier ship dates less expensive rather than more expensive?

There's a price bracket/performance sweet-spot where a camera magically disappears into complete irrelevancy for 99% of people. This one hits that sweet-spot. I'm sorry, but $30K (likely more)?! I'm sorry, but that places it squarely as a rental cam in almost every case, and up against ARRI/RED offerings. I know what Alexa (and even Amira) can do, and sorry, but a Canon won't come close. Not even ballpark. I feel gross mentioning them in the same sentence. And if ARRI ain't your style, there's a high chance that RED has you covered, and in many cases for well under $30K. If by chance you're REALLY docu, I'd throw my money at however many Sony FS-5s you need. That new electronic ND should be a complete run -n-gun game changer. If you're still not covered by those options, you're either Nolan/Tarantino, and only film will do, or you're one of the countless professionals that realize: any of a number of DSLR/mirror less cameras will get you damn near close enough, for 1/10th the cost, in 90% of situations, if you know what you're doing. I LOVE pouring over gear specs, especially cameras, and mentally crunching the numbers. But almost since the 5DII, Canon have been consistently making cameras that just don't match up in the price/performance categories. I'm not saying they don't make good cameras, they do. But they're either too pricey vs the competition, too late to the party, or too flawed. At the risk of being "that guy" that brings the Samsung NX1 into every thread, that's what I've shot on since it came out, and I fully expect it to last another 1-2 years as my a-cam. I have ISO mapped to one wheel, Aperture to another, and Shutter Speed to the third. White Balance is a button press away (though quite frankly the AWB produces more pleasing color than the presets 90% of the time), and a variable ND filter fills out the kit alongside that killer 16-50 zoom, which pulls focus like a champ with no hunting. It truly resolves UHD and 1080p. Works for me. There are folks with Sonys, Panasonics, Nikons, Fujis, and even Canons that would say the same. At this point I glance at new Canon offerings, and read them in-depth later when I need a good laugh.

I'm so far done with Canon. Have been for years. Y'all have fun still giving a crap because I sure don't. I've gotta go to work every day with my gear, and as long as you know your gear, you can do good work. Is it nice to have all these features? Sure. But at what price? As long as you know your core camera functions and how they influence exposure/motion/color/texture/etc, most modern cameras will do fine. Alas near as I can tell, there are two truly innovative features out in the last few years, both related to single-op use: DPAF: for all your non-hunting autofocus needs Electronic Variable ND: Smart Transition Lenses For Your Camera (tm)

Everything is at f4 through my Konica Hexanon 40mm f1.8 and Zeiss C/Y 50mm f1.4. I'm not a fan of the blue blobs either, but for the price it has been a very good solution for focus. I'll probably stick with it until someone manages to make an acceptable and affordable anamorphic prime.

Hopefully they have enough success with this 4K camera to convince them to include 4K on the rumored medium format mirrorless camera too. I'd rock a 4K MF camera with Fuji color science till the cows come home!

I've always been surprised at people that swear by 1.33X or 1.5X anamorphics, because it seems that they don't understand this stuff. It is a HUGE part of the look! If you're going to go less than 2X (or if you're going to use a rear anamorph), you almost may as well just use a streak filter and crop with a barrel-distorted spherical prime. One of my better ideas would be for someone to do a range of 1.5X lenses where the aperture itself is a 1.5X oval. DSO already technically does this with their TRUMP lenses (as individual disks), but a nice 11-bladed aperture mechanism would not be difficult to redesign to close as an oval rather than as a circle. IMO you still need at minimum 1.5X to get decent flares that aren't thin and wimpy.

Meanwhile I've been shooting corporate stuff all day long with my Sammy NX1/Ronin M combo. No slow-mo, but the colors and resolution are gorgeous.

Hmm focus-throughs always seemed sketchy to me. But if it works at f4 and is sharp throughout the range, then go with it!

Get yourself a single-focus unit (Rectilux or Rangefinder), and a monitor that can de-squeeze the image. I personally stick to f4 and think it almost always looks fantastic.

The blueness of those coatings makes me want to vomit. There's far more complexity to good anamorphic flares than the coatings that SLR Magic has been slathering on their otherwise exemplary optics. I also consistently find the images out of 1.33X systems to come off as awkward: not clinical enough compared to good spherical, but not unique enough compared to a good 2X Ana. Just.... Awkward looking, checking all the boxes on paper but missing the mark in practice. There's no reason not to shoot 2X now that 4K is so accessible.

I would advise against putting anything unnecessary in between the taking lens/anamorphic/rangefinder. Anamorphics work better when they're as close to the taking lens as possible. Same goes for diopters (the Rangefinder is a diopter.)

Yes, I could've rendered motion blur on the cross-processed effects and the non slow-mo shots, but I like that the crispness keeps everything from being too muddy in the effects shots. It is 30p down from 60p, so that the slow-mo remains "in time" with the music (just halved in speed.) This causes the non-slowmo to be crisper, but because of the shooting schedule constraints, I had to shoot everything 60p just so that slowmo was an option on all shots.

I recently shot and edited this 2X anamorphic music video, rigged up on my DJI Ronin-M. The Kowa 16-H is already heavy, but add an SLR Magic Rangefinder in front, and along with a DSLR, the gimbal is at its length and weight limit. The band footage was shot in 3 short hours after a last-minute location change, and we just managed to fully cover the song, having thrown out unnecessary parts of the storyboard. The color effects were shot non-anamorphic, on the NX1 with 16-50 OIS and the trusty GH2 with an 85mm f1.4 Zeiss C/Y prime (pretty sure it's still running either Moon T6 or 7.) While there ultimately are a lot of cross-processing effects, the 2X anamorphic look still adds something unmistakable to my eyes. I made the decision early on to sacrifice 4K for an increase in frame rate to 60p for slow-motion flexibility in post, which did come in very handy. The Rangefinder wasn't used at all to pull focus during shots, but it made it much easier to refocus in between takes, and it seems to guarantee sharper results if you pay attention to what you are doing. Edited in FCPX and effects in Motion

Quality 2X lenses still need to happen IMO. The real enduring highlight here is once again the NX1. Don't get me wrong, SLR Magic have done a lot for the Anamorphic community, and their Rangefinder is the best thing since sliced bread. But when it comes to their anamorphics, they just don't fit what I'm looking for, and they really don't offer anything over a good projection Ana either. 2X is the whole point. With 4K so accessible, just shoot spherical with a streak filter and crop. Speaking of of streak filters, that's what SLR Magic's blue flares look like, and it's not a great look. Either clean it up with modern coatings or work some serious mojo into it. Tinting the whole shebang the same shade of blue is rather uninspiring. I'm pretty sure my Kowa is still the widest 2X Ana out there, outside of a few primes from Hawk/Panovision. The LOMO 35mm is probably about the same FOV as what I have set up, and I can switch primes and do the same on full frame too. I've used the Kowa on paid projects, and it really is a viable solution until there are new anamorphics available that can truly match its versatility. Anamorphic really shines when it is wide. It's not that longer lenses don't have their uses, they do. But 50mm 2X is not wide. 25mm/S35 would be the holy grail, Or 35mm, and a 3-4 lens set built on that (35/50/75/100). That's just my 2c on the matter. I know others love these lenses but for me they miss the mark especially at the price point. 1.33X is kinda half-heartedly anamorphic in the first place, and on top of that there's not a wide enough option in their 2X offerings. The flares feel forced/contrived, and that really makes them still feel more like SLR Magic's other prosumer priced glass. I hope they can truly graduate to playing with the big boys, but to my eyes, they're not quite there yet.

I have the Rangefinder for this same lens and it works great!

Does it cover s35?

Kowa 16-H/8Z. Very sharp, very wide. True 2X squeeze. It's the widest projection 2X out there, all it needs is clamps front and rear.

Brian, I just had a thought and I'm no optics expert, but does anamorphic feel like a "bigger" image in the same way that a SpeedBooster makes S35 FEEL bigger (more VistaVision), because they ARE essentially doing the same thing, just that anamorphic only does it in one axis? Is anamorphic the original SpeedBooster, but for horizontal only?

Also, Brian... SpeedBooster for Medium Format to Full Frame? I love this type of stuff that gives looks that are usually only Hollywood or pro photographic.

FWIW, my Small-HD AC7 can do 100% custom scaling. Mind you, when you push it, the unused areas of the screen get some crazy digital garbage, but I've desqueezed my Kowa at 2X and cropped it to 2.76:1. Setting up for a non-standard squeeze is just as easy, just some basic maths. Not every monitor an do this, of course, but it is possible. I'd say go for it one way or another. For whatever it's worth, in a year or two I'm hoping to step up to a better anamorphic solution, something between $2-3K. If you've proved one thing with the SpeedBoosters, it's that you don't f*ck around when it comes to designing optics. I have a Kowa with a Rangefinder, and the single-focus has already made a night and day difference, and has reassured me that anamorphic really can be useable in 4K and on professional projects with the right lens setup. I just this week used anamorphic on a paid shoot for the first time, and while it went well, there are a few things that could still use improvement. 1. Field of View. I'm getting about a 35mm FOV horizontally, and that on APSC/S35. While this is decent, it's right at the sweet spot for portraits and just a touch shy of feeling wide. It's so close I can almost see it, but something just under 30mm would produce truly stunning landscapes and establishing shots. What's more, this is just out of reach with projection adapters. Break the "FOV Barrier", I think there's a real gap in the market there. 2. Flares. There was a long phase with the anamorphic hobbyists where it was all the rage to hate on flares, and there's still a negative stigma around it. Good or bad, flares with the current options for lower budget anamorphics are a big hot mess. Some of the projection anas have ok flares, but the new SLR Magic offerings just look strange. What's more, the single focus adapters can't seem to make up their minds. The Rangefinder is tack sharp, but for some reason it has pseudo-vintage blue coatings which put strange blue haze spots in the image. Whatever you do with flares, be decisive. Either nail a vintage look with rich thick flares, or clean it up 100% with modern coatings and keep it all about the bokeh. 3. Lens size. Of course, any anamorphic worth it's price tag will be no pancake lens, but stack a UV filter on a Rangefinder on a step ring on a front clamp on a Kowa on a rear clamp on another step ring on a pancake lens on a lens mount adapter, and you've got a portrait prime lens longer and heavier than a 24-70. I would hope that an integrated anamorphic could be made a bit smaller and more compact than this, especially with the help of modern optics. 4. Lens support. This is a HUGE deal if you go the "front adapter" route. Seriously. I'm considering getting my Rangefinder modded to have a rod lens support, because it's just needed. Let's face it, all the projection anas are a decent size and weight once rigged on front of a lens. There are ALWAYS a lot of parts to get it all hooked up end-to-end. Mine shifts around when I turn the Rangefinder focus ring, causing alignment wobble. Include a way to easily bolt the focus adapter to some rails, so that torque applied while focusing doesn't affect the rest of the setup behind it. Alternatively, this is my prime reason for wanting to move to an all-in-one-housing lens. All the various parts and pieces provide no end of possible failure points. My ideal anamorphic would be a 30mm S-35 in the neighborhood of 2X squeeze (anything significantly less and why freaking bother? Shoot spherical.) Alternatively, 40/45-ish full frame. I'm serious when I say that anything beyond f/4 would be welcome but not required. Because of the way anamorphic renders out of focus areas, I've consistently found that f/4 is not only adequately shallow... It is also sharp and manageable. You want to see the smear, not obliterate it in completely out of focus mush. Around the $2-2.5K mark would be my sweet spot, with of course a 50mm and something longer like 75/85mm also available eventually to fill out a 3 lens set. Again, I'd be most enticed by a wide in the standalone lens department, because anyone these days can grab a projection ana and shoot >50mm stuff. Being able to tell clients that "yes, I have a full three lens set that is reliable and we can shoot anamorphic" is an entirely different ballgame and the wide is what makes a new set better than (for example) a set of LOMOs, along with modern sharpness and usability/reliability. I think wide FOV is a defining characteristic of cinema anamorphic, every bit as much as bokeh, flares or lens distortion, and that's why the projection anas always feel like they just fall short a little. I would leave the single focus adapters to SLR Magic and Rectilux, unless you can beat SLR Magic in quality for the price point. It's a very capable adapter for anyone in the market for a solution to their projection lens woes. Anyone hell-bent on using a projection ana on a high quality level will shell out for the Rectilux. There's a huge hole in the "real anamorphic" prime lens market, basically anywhere below Hawk (and obviously way below Panovision). Go for that sweet spot, kinda like the Xeen lenses. More serious than plain Rokinons, but not quite bank-breaking like CP.2s. Catch the top end of the hobbyist market, and the everyday working stiff profesionals who until you came along hadn't even considered anamorphic.

perfect description of their color science. It shouldn't be so difficult to wrangle into something pleasing to look at.

Their first camera with a good codec plus their variable ND will sell like freaking hot cakes. Doubly so if it is full frame. Variable ND is really the ideal/ultimate way to handle exposure compensation, and putting it in the body as an electronic system is just bonkers-awesome. Unless Samsung come back with a vengeance, my next camera will be a Sony. There's something about their color science that bugs me, but at the rate they're going, I'd be willing to deal with that in favor of other advantages.