Caleb Genheimer

Hi, all!
I personally would like to have a space to discuss new developments in anamorphic lenses, how they compare to tried-and-true options, and perhaps even where things may be headed in the not too distant future. 
 
My copy of Andrew's Anamorphic guide is, I think, up to date, and yet it simply doesn't touch on some of the newer stuff that's come out. (Andrew, if you're reading this, get your hands on an FM Module, and a Rectilux, and push SLR Magic for some info on their 2X Ana.)
 
The FM Module seems promising: works well with Schneiders, but the Schneiders themselves have some distortion problems . . . may yet work even better with other projection anas.
 
The Rectilux looks to be more or less the same kind of optical solution as the FM Module, albeit bespoke, and I suspect higher quality too (though at the moment mostly vaporware). 
 
Andrew wrote one article on a 2X from SLR Magic, and I have not heard anything since. And honestly, I wasn't impressed with their 1.3X (nor were others. They seemed to be quickly resold by early adopters, same with the VanDemien ISCO. There are several on the 'bay already.)
 
So what do people think? There are of course the old faithfuls: Iscoramas, LOMOs, and a smattering of vintage single-focus options. How does it all stack up? 
 
I'll start things off by saying that I'm cautiously optimistic about the future of 2X Anamorphics

Hi, all!
I personally would like to have a space to discuss new developments in anamorphic lenses, how they compare to tried-and-true options, and perhaps even where things may be headed in the not too distant future. 
 
My copy of Andrew's Anamorphic guide is, I think, up to date, and yet it simply doesn't touch on some of the newer stuff that's come out. (Andrew, if you're reading this, get your hands on an FM Module, and a Rectilux, and push SLR Magic for some info on their 2X Ana.)
 
The FM Module seems promising: works well with Schneiders, but the Schneiders themselves have some distortion problems . . . may yet work even better with other projection anas.
 
The Rectilux looks to be more or less the same kind of optical solution as the FM Module, albeit bespoke, and I suspect higher quality too (though at the moment mostly vaporware). 
 
Andrew wrote one article on a 2X from SLR Magic, and I have not heard anything since. And honestly, I wasn't impressed with their 1.3X (nor were others. They seemed to be quickly resold by early adopters, same with the VanDemien ISCO. There are several on the 'bay already.)
 
So what do people think? There are of course the old faithfuls: Iscoramas, LOMOs, and a smattering of vintage single-focus options. How does it all stack up? 
 
I'll start things off by saying that I'm cautiously optimistic about the future of 2X Anamorphics

Hi, all!
I personally would like to have a space to discuss new developments in anamorphic lenses, how they compare to tried-and-true options, and perhaps even where things may be headed in the not too distant future. 
 
My copy of Andrew's Anamorphic guide is, I think, up to date, and yet it simply doesn't touch on some of the newer stuff that's come out. (Andrew, if you're reading this, get your hands on an FM Module, and a Rectilux, and push SLR Magic for some info on their 2X Ana.)
 
The FM Module seems promising: works well with Schneiders, but the Schneiders themselves have some distortion problems . . . may yet work even better with other projection anas.
 
The Rectilux looks to be more or less the same kind of optical solution as the FM Module, albeit bespoke, and I suspect higher quality too (though at the moment mostly vaporware). 
 
Andrew wrote one article on a 2X from SLR Magic, and I have not heard anything since. And honestly, I wasn't impressed with their 1.3X (nor were others. They seemed to be quickly resold by early adopters, same with the VanDemien ISCO. There are several on the 'bay already.)
 
So what do people think? There are of course the old faithfuls: Iscoramas, LOMOs, and a smattering of vintage single-focus options. How does it all stack up? 
 
I'll start things off by saying that I'm cautiously optimistic about the future of 2X Anamorphics

Yeah, this is unfortunate. They shouldn't have advertised it as compatible with Kowa/Sankor lenses. I was hoping to put it on my Kowa 16-H (8Z), as it is a very sharp and wide projection ANA, without the distortion that comes with the ISCO/Schneider "gold" style lenses. I may still if others confirm that it's possible (with modification), but for now, I'm going to sit this one out. The 16-H/8Z is the sweet-spot of anamorphics, other than the fact that it is double-focus. You can eek by with as wide as 50mm on full frame (if cropping to 2.35), and it has smooth blue flares. It can look crisp, clean, dirty, Hollywood or Russian depending on what taking lens you use. 
If someone proves that it's doable, I don't see why not. I mean, once you get a lens set inside the FM, there's no reason to remove it. But all this disassembly malarky is rather disappointing.

​I wish they actually tried different lenses to see which really fits.  I saw the demo so I kinda knew I'd have to get an Isco or Schneider.  Still my anamorphic collection is growing.  I'd really like to pare it down and I sure hope the FM works well.

​I'm really bummed by this.  Might have to buy an Isco then.  I was really looking forward to this working with my Kowa.

Well I'm on the list, but I have a Kowa 16-H. It was my understanding that they had solutions for all the various projection lenses, because they listed them as compatible. Truth is they don't yet. I asked, and they said I can wait until their Kowa solution is available, and they'll still honor my discount.

IMO they also need to sort out the rail mount. 1/4-20 is a crap way to do it, no way to keep the lens parallel with the rails.

What do you mean? Rack focus is the whole point of the FM

What do you mean? Rack focus is the whole point of the FM

Depends on your definition of "too wide" :) It is a sort of internal "flare"/optical imperfection. But if we're talking anamorphic, optical imperfections are a bit of a grey area (pun intended). It's not too wide, it has image corner-to-corner. But when it gets hit with light, flares in a sort of grey "vignette". Even the "real-deal" lenses from Panavision, etc. can do this. In the land of anamorpnics, I think "everything in moderation" is an excellent rule of thumb. I've seen this optical nuance used both well and poorly, just as I have with horizontal flares. 

Depends on your definition of "too wide" :) It is a sort of internal "flare"/optical imperfection. But if we're talking anamorphic, optical imperfections are a bit of a grey area (pun intended). It's not too wide, it has image corner-to-corner. But when it gets hit with light, flares in a sort of grey "vignette". Even the "real-deal" lenses from Panavision, etc. can do this. In the land of anamorpnics, I think "everything in moderation" is an excellent rule of thumb. I've seen this optical nuance used both well and poorly, just as I have with horizontal flares. 

I am going to send the list  tomorrow to the anamorphic shop and negotiate if that is possible for the best discount price.
I will let you know how it goes, x fingers, ;) 
 I am going to ask them if they can provide  a coupon code for the ones who are in the list.
If any of you have any suggestions please do not hesitate to let me know.
Feel free, you are welcome.
thank you.

It's among the best animorphics. Only the Ultrastar-type lenses are sharper, and they can't go as wide FOV-wise.

Also, what's up with the flare hate around here?! Everything in moderation, fellas :)

Just because the new Star Trek had too many flares doesn't suddenly make them bad, just like everyone and their mum shooting on DSLR didn't make shallow DOF a bad thing either.

Also, what's up with the flare hate around here?! Everything in moderation, fellas :)

Just because the new Star Trek had too many flares doesn't suddenly make them bad, just like everyone and their mum shooting on DSLR didn't make shallow DOF a bad thing either.

Really, it's a bit apples and oranges. Sure, they do similar things, but not altogether the same things. I think as Rich pointed out, DSO is PERFECT behind an Iscorama. The 1.5x is more practical, but its effects less pronounced, and that's where the DSO lens can help with its oval aperture.

I'm very happy this FM lens is a possibility though, because (as Rich said), the cinelux are very sharp, and it'd be a dream to single focus one of those bad boys on front of my C/Y Zeiss glass and one of those new 4k cams

Also, what's up with the flare hate around here?! Everything in moderation, fellas :)

Just because the new Star Trek had too many flares doesn't suddenly make them bad, just like everyone and their mum shooting on DSLR didn't make shallow DOF a bad thing either.

Count me as interested

Wow, Panasonic really wants my money!!! It's so positive not only from a features/price ratio, but from the fact that they are finally listening what people wants!!!!!!!  :P  :lol:  :D  ;)
 
I had the LX100 in my radar, but this could change everything!!!

Nice theory, unfortunately you're wrong and you really need to do some research. Anamorphic was designed to avoid cropping to achieve the wider aspect ratio.

I don't need to download any 4K files to know that this thing is going to start floating around on quite a few 3-axis gimbals and multi-rotor copters ;-)

I don't need to download any 4K files to know that this thing is going to start floating around on quite a few 3-axis gimbals and multi-rotor copters ;-)

I don't need to download any 4K files to know that this thing is going to start floating around on quite a few 3-axis gimbals and multi-rotor copters ;-)

IMAX cat videos please.

Pretty much on the contrary. E-mount is one of the most adaptable mounts, allowing you to use both cine lenses and stills lenses from Canon, Nikon, etc. including legacy lenses. If PL is what you are after, it is simple:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/808236-REG/16x9_Inc_169_CLM_PLE_Cine_Lens_Mount_PL.html
 
As an added plus, you can use a speedbooster if you want a "Full Frame" cinema camera.