Caleb Genheimer

Here's what I got. It's mine, so you can have it if you want. I've already done this video, but it's just random extra footage that I had sitting around, I'd love to see it paired with some more intentional footage.

I'm sitting tight until I save enough to get into either an Iscorama or a set of LOMO squarefronts. I'd prefer the squarefronts, but only time will tell. I currently use a Kowa 16-H with Redstan clamps and the almighty Tokina ATX diopter, which I shan't part with any time soon. When I rent, I rent old Zeiss. Standards, or Supers if the budget allows. If it doesn't, then I've got a set of Tamron Adaptall-II primes that perform adequately in most scenarios. I hate fly-by-wire with a passion. I am not a zoom man (mostly because they're all fly-by-wire AF these days).

Well, here's one I did with Resolve. I battled Vimeo tooth-and-nail with this one, their re-encoding was doing some seriously strange stuff to it. I ended up screenshotting the Vimeo playback, and correcting the screenshot back as close to "target" as I could. Then I applied that correction to my footage and re-exported/uploaded. It's fairly close to my intentions, but still not exactly what I see in Resolve or in Desktop playback of the file. The video isn't really released public yet, so keep it on the D-L. Password: Danger Dave

I love me some Kino, TBH. The light out of those suckers is so unique. Soft, smooth and . . . IDK, permeating? (Best word I can think of to describe it). It's like having a cloudy day on hand in a couple tubes.

Almost all GH2.

Get both front and rear clamps, well worth the extra price. I have the same lens you have with Redstan clamps. Having the Redstan clamps with the anamorphic will increase it's resale value considerably, should you be worried about such things. Ask him if he still has 0.4 ATX Tokina diopters for sale. They're the best diopter out there, and they're not getting any easier to find. He had some when I got clamps, so I got one, and let's just say I'm never getting rid of it, even if I do upgrade anamorphics.

This, right here. Blackmagic just took a dump on everything offered by the competition that's north of $6500. I mean, I have to essentially factor in a 1080p monitor, an audio field recorder and a v-mount battery solution if I compare the URSA to anything else. Add to that the (likely) ability to upgrade my sensor . . . wow. URSA is a heavy woman, but she sure as heck ain't lacking.

Geeze, lay off it a bit. Everyone's rather polarized here. We haven't seen jack squat out of most of these cameras, GH4 and A7s included. 1. Just because the GH4 does 4K and is a lightweight Mirrorless doesn't mean there's no place for a 7.5KG camera. 2. This new URSA, as Andy Lee pointed out, ticks an awful lot of boxes, even if it is heavy. 3. It ditches that darned awful BMCC form factor. 4. I see physical buttons, thank the Lord. Let's not condone or condemn a thing until all this has been tested in the field.

Ugh. Sorry, I'm not even a Blackmagic user, and I'm miffed. It was my understanding that the Production Cinema Camera was their "studio" cam. It is, after all, 3840x2160 (AKA UHD, NOT DCI 4K). THey do need to reign themselves in, it's getting ridiculous. They need to leave the EOS mount in the dust, IMO. It's a relic from the days when we needed mirrors on our cameras. For stills, it makes sense. For video, it is a lens adapting nightmare. Where are the built in ND filters? Mirrorless mounts? 4096x2160 resolution?

Where are you at with these? I should note, that when I said I'd pay $1500, i meant for an anamorphic adapter. I would assume the DS primes would come separately, at their own price-points. I badly need a set of matched lenses!

Andrew, IMO, Blackmagic needs to just have all their cameras available in one mount. I get that Canon is the logical choice for many, but others want short FFD. Why not EOS-M mount? Id think thatd fit the bill in both cases quite nicely.

I'm eager for that 4K Blackmagic camera to really get out in the wild for a few months. Its two features short of my "perfect camera", and I suspect that, given enough money, certain shops would mod it for me. If I can get that EF mount modded to something shorter for a grand or two, I'd be happy. If the new mount included some sort of ND system (even just a slot I can drop small circulars into), I'd be over the moon. S35, RAW with global shutter is a trifecta impossible to ignore, especially at $4K.

This is what I've been waiting for. 25mm at f2?! I'm there.

For me, I love the look coming from your DS lenses, and would love to see an anamorphic with a decent squeeze (no 1.33X BS) added into the mix. BUT . . . I need a set of lenses that match. This above all else is what I'm looking for right now, a set of at least three matched lenses faster than f2.8. If you can muster a couple more lenses in other focal lengths, to go along with the FF58, I'd be VERY tempted. If you add to that set a single-focus anamorphic (or anamorphics), you've got me, hook line and sinker for $1500+, no question.

Depending on the price, this is going to really tempt me . . . even if I personally prefer a 2X squeeze and the amazing bokeh that accompanies it. As for flares, I guess I voted blue, but in reality, what Id like to see is a deep navy blue extremely stretched oval directly from the light source with a teal blue (almost green) streak opposing flare (the one not by the light source). iIf you can pull those two things off in good saturation, the correct selection of a taking lens will fill in the gaps (rainbow, blue/green ovals, even yellow or gold ovals, which are my personal favorite when mixed with the blue streaks).   Have you given any thought to a neutral density component (either within the anamorphic itself, or as an accessory for inbetween the anamorphic and taking lens)? One of the big challenges Ive faced while shooting anamorphic is that a ND on front reduces the anamorphics response to flare. I almost always still opt to use one so that I can shoot without stopping down, but if I could have both Id be extra happy.    If the flares are too thin, spindly or unsaturated . . . . just suppress them. Another bane of the current 1.33X lenses seems to be this problem as well. 

This is awesome. hope it works. Could be tricky seeing as anamorphic optical alignment of elements needs to be very precise.

Is there anyone in Minnesota with an anamorphic? I just landed a music video gig, and I've secured an extra GH2 body, but not an extra anamorphic. I am willing to pay to rent from someone.

Sorry, in order to match the MOVI "blow for blow", it needs to be for sale. I've been waiting in vain for someone to make a comparable unit that is for sale outright. Everything out there right now is too small and wouldn't take the payload of a full DSLR+anamorphic setup.

Hi, All!   Just thought I'd share some color grading that I've been fiddling with. I shot a bunch of footage at the local carnival a month back, and now I'm working on grading it for one of my personal music video projects.    I've used my own take on a bleach bypass process that simultaneously adds the teeniest touch of blue to the lows, then with a couple more nodes, I've tweaked exposure and of course that nasty red/orange/yellow/green zone of color that seems to always make or break skintones has had some subtle adjustments.   Lemme know what you think!   http://www.flickr.com/photos/68917223@N05/sets/72157634804640007/with/9375308962/  

I never will understand people that pre-order such a significant piece of gear, but I guess that's just how I go about things. Even when I got my GH2, it had been out for some time, and Intra hacking was already a thing. It just seems to make more sense to wait and see how a camera performs in the wild.    For me, this whole "when will it ship?" question seems silly. Sure, I like reading about newly announced cameras and their specs, but I wouldn't even bother with a camera unless it has been well tested by a decent customer base.

I think (and I'm not 100% on this) . . . that is what is called the anamorphic "mumps". Higher end and newer lenses like those coming from Zeiss claim to have left the mumps behind, but older anamorphics (even the high end ones) had the mumps to varying degrees.

Most all anamorphics vary in ratio based on your focus point. The closer you are focused, the less you have to desqueeze. When focused at infinity with my Kowa, it is pretty much a true 2X desqueeze. When focused close, however (say, 5ft), it can be as little as a 1.5X desqueeze. 

You can probably use it with a 40-50mm lens on Micro Four Thirds cameras. on APS-C, you might need a 50-60mm lens. I don't have one, I have a Kowa, but my Kowa is supposed to go a bit wider than the Sankors, and I can do 35mm on GH2, 45-50mm on APS-C. ON fullfram photographic (like the 5D), I need at least an 85mm lens, so you probably need something like a 90 or 100mm. Just try a couple lenses and you will know. Get manual prime lenses like Canon FD, Contax Zeiss, Tamron SP, or Nikon AI/AI-s, etc. as anamorphic lenses work best with those types of lenses.   Honestly, just experiment a bit. The Sankors are for the most part on the better end of the spectrum, except for the fact that you must focus both prime and anamorphic (but hey, unless you've got major $$$ for a Lomo or a genuine Iscorama, you pretty much have to dual focus).    Everyone is suggesting getting the guide because it is quite helpful and really . . . it isn't very expensive. Any money you spend on it you will probably save in the long run because it will save you from making a bad purchase or two . . . and help you make the right one too.

I'm still confused as to why so many people are so excited about the Pocket Cam. The tiny-ness of the body really throws me off for some reason, as does the sensor size. In certain situations, yes . . . the tiny body comes in handy. But more often than not (for my uses), this thing is impractically small. I have a GH2, which has a sensor slightly bigger (due to multi-aspect) than other M4/3 cams, and even then I'm frustrated with the crop factor about 30% of the time. And this is all coming from someone who has never had a S35mm or full-frame photographic camera (I went straight from my first camera . . Canon GL2 . . . to the GH2). I'd be all over the pocket cam except for in the back of my head I feel the move to a smaller sensor would not be smart. Say what you will about shallow depth of field being overused and whatnot, but it has its place and should be controlled properly. You can't control what isn't there, though. You can always stop down a larger sensor cam for deep depth of field, but the smaller sensor cams can't do the reverse. In my mind, the 4K Production cam is the real incredible camera, and the one I've got my eye on. It is more expensive, but in the grand scheme of things, not radically so. I've still (perhaps foolishly) got hopes that they'll come out with a version of the 4K cam that has a short flange focal distance mount, because EF is just plain limiting.   There are so many incredible and cheap used photographic primes out there that would jive with the 4K cam, but that would act like small telescopes on the Pocket. I suspect that to really get stellar glass for the Pocket, you'll end up paying the difference between the Pocket and the 4K cam. So much of the stuff out there seems to be 16mm, not S16mm. 

Wondering about the focus. Both prime and anamorphic must be focused, right? If you can get that Flex-eDrive thing up and running to make it single-focus, you'll have my attention.