nahua

Testing lenses if you're interested.  50mm has slight vigenette, but I cropped the sides to conform to 2.39 ratio.

I use a Sony WA adapter for their handy cams.  The front thread of the BH is almost 55mm, so just use a step ring to attach a WA adapter.  I used the Sony because they are readily available and cheap.  Because the one I'm using is 0.7x, it makes lenses a little wider.   Handling is tough though.  The weight of the WA adapter makes the setup extremely front heavy.  I always use rails to mount the lens.  Also the front rotates, so make sure your lens is clean.

Yes I got the new sleeve for the Baby Hypergonar.  With the Rangefinder and Vari-ND filter, it becomes a very front heavy setup.  I find I can go with 35mm as widest, with the Vari-ND I get a lot of vigenette.  I tried a 28mm but it just was too much.  I hope to get the CoreDNA when it's available in June, and then test it out again.

I use a Sony WA adapter for their handy cams.  The front thread of the BH is almost 55mm, so just use a step ring to attach a WA adapter.  I used the Sony because they are readily available and cheap.  Because the one I'm using is 0.7x, it makes lenses a little wider.   Handling is tough though.  The weight of the WA adapter makes the setup extremely front heavy.  I always use rails to mount the lens.  Also the front rotates, so make sure your lens is clean.

I recommend this app too.  Used it on my GH4 and G85.  Works really well and I really like the squeeze options.  Just a few notes:
- I like to change focus for AF using the touch screen.  However the screen goes into sleep mode after 10 seconds, and if I touch the screen it says "camera is under remote control".  So I have to go into the Panasonic Image App to change focus on the fly.
- G7 workaround is good for G85 and works well.
- very little lag
- for manual focusing especially with 2x anamorphics, using focus punch-in BEFORE recording also punches in the image on the app
- very good for handheld gimbal use.  So not just for anamorphic squeeze.  I'll take some pics of my setup later.
Although I thought it was pricey at first, this is a real great app.  Now I can use my iPhone 6s Plus or iPad Mini2 for a monitor and it works really well.  I'm used to my SmallHD DP4 with custom squeeze ratio, but this app is a way better solution.  Plus I can now record 4:3 anamorphic with monitoring and larger internal recording size.  I had to rent an Atomos Shogun before to monitor (and of course external recording) and it's also a hassle for all the wires and rigging.  This is a much simpler solution and easier for run-n-gun or mobile solutions.  Thank you Mjas for this great app!!!

I recommend this app too.  Used it on my GH4 and G85.  Works really well and I really like the squeeze options.  Just a few notes:
- I like to change focus for AF using the touch screen.  However the screen goes into sleep mode after 10 seconds, and if I touch the screen it says "camera is under remote control".  So I have to go into the Panasonic Image App to change focus on the fly.
- G7 workaround is good for G85 and works well.
- very little lag
- for manual focusing especially with 2x anamorphics, using focus punch-in BEFORE recording also punches in the image on the app
- very good for handheld gimbal use.  So not just for anamorphic squeeze.  I'll take some pics of my setup later.
Although I thought it was pricey at first, this is a real great app.  Now I can use my iPhone 6s Plus or iPad Mini2 for a monitor and it works really well.  I'm used to my SmallHD DP4 with custom squeeze ratio, but this app is a way better solution.  Plus I can now record 4:3 anamorphic with monitoring and larger internal recording size.  I had to rent an Atomos Shogun before to monitor (and of course external recording) and it's also a hassle for all the wires and rigging.  This is a much simpler solution and easier for run-n-gun or mobile solutions.  Thank you Mjas for this great app!!!

I just wanted to share that I've released an iOS app that is kind of like the pana app, but full screen and with some basic image controls; anamorphic de-squeeze (1.33x, 1.5x, 2x) and brightness / contrast / saturation for working with V-Log.
Here's the App Store link: http://bit.ly/scopes-ios-app
Video showing lag is comparable or better than pana app
 
Scopes app + GH4 + SLR Magic Anamorphot 1.33x

 
Scopes app + G7 + Möller 2x
(G7 is not officially supported and needs you to start pana app first)

 
App Store link: http://bit.ly/scopes-ios-app

Thanks Squig!  I think I'll try ML again!  Thanks for posting all the links, makes it so much easier to find all the info.

Hello!
Sooooo...  I've spent several days off and on combing through the magic lantern forums to find an answer to no avail.  At this point you can snag a Mark 3 for a sweet deal, but I'd like to add ML for raw capabilities.  It's been a while since I followed its progress, and last time I checked in, Canon okey-doked everyone with a newer firmware that didn't allow the ML port.  All newer shipping Mark 3's wouldn't allow it, and you couldn't downgrade to the older firmware I'm told??  - so it's pretty much pointless..  
I'm just curious if Magic Lantern works on the latest firmware for the Mark 3 and if it's stable.  1920x1080 raw with 1066 CF Lexars?  Thanks in advance!  
This video still blows my mind.  Gorgeous:
 

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.

Thanks for your comments.  I agree regarding the bokeh shape.  In the case of my test shot the bokeh is actually nine-sided, which is created by the iris shape in the Nikon 135mm f/2 AiS Nikkor that I used as a spherical backer lens.  Upcoming integrated primes will use a very circular iris to yield nice smooth elliptical bokeh.

Sample image looks very promising indeed...  My only criticism is the hexagonal bokeh that is shown..  If integrating with a dedicated prime, this would need to have as "circular" bokeh as possible..
 
Anamorphic loses a lot of its look to me when it becomes hexagonal, which I do not find as appealing..
Look forward to more updates!

I've recently started numerous anamorphic lens projects based on the idea that 1.79x squeeze is the ideal ratio when dealing with a 4:3 sensor .  It's often stated that 2x squeeze on 4:3 gives you the DCI standard 2.39:1 scope ratio, but of course this isn't quite true.  If you really want a perfect mapping of 4:3 to 2.39:1 without having to crop the sides, then the correct math  is:  2.39/(4/3) = 1.7925, which I'll round off to 1.79.  So, for the ARRI Alexa, RED Dragon and Panasonic GH4 used in 4:3 mode it seems to me that 1.79x is ideal.  Also, if you consider the Alexa in its Open Gate format (1.55:1) you get 1.55 * 1.79 = 2.77:1, which is almost exactly equal to the classic Ultra Panavision 70 (2.76:1 aspect ratio).
You might be concerned that 1.79x wouldn't give enough anamorphic artifacts, but based on my experience so far it seems that the artifacts are very similar to 2x, and in addition there are significant advantages in size, weight, cost, and image quality.  Some time ago I built a 1.80x prototype that used very traditional rear-group focusing with counter-rotating astigmatizer aberration compensation, and found that it compared very favorably to a similar-spec 2x 140mm Hawk V-Lite:
 
So, my question is, since I'm about to start spending money like crazy developing this stuff, am I crazy to be going in this direction?
 

Thanks for your feedback on the squeeze ratio - I was definitely interested in what you would think.
I own Caldwell Photographic, and I design all the Speed Booster optics.

I guess the more you pay, the less you get ?  Don started the list of features you don't get with:
No peaking.
No zebras.
No C-Log.
Only 1080p HDMI output.
Here are some more:
No built-in WiFi, needs $600 dongle.
No articulated screen.
I also have to say what is up with the tiny screen size on such a huge, heavy premium-priced camera?  The smallest cheapest smartphones have bigger screens than this monster.  With the amount of unused space on the back of this massive camera, Canon could of incorporated a much larger screen and still would of had plenty of space left over.
My little Panasonic G7 has peaking, zebras, 4K HDMI output, built-in WiFi and an articulated screen and costs only $750 with a kit lens, versus the Canon at $6K with no lens.  The G7 even comes with a high-res OLED viewfinder.  The Canon 1D X is a better stills camera and better in low light.  But with its high price (you can buy eight G7s with eight lenses for the cost of one 1D X body), the list of missing features on the Canon is disappointing.
 

Its official.
No peaking. 
No zebras.
No C-Log.
Only 1080p HDMI output. 
 And while Canon clearly protect their video cameras, Nikon not only do not jump into the video bandwagon but also implement a 3min time limit. 

Everyone and their mom have been screaming about 4k 60fps in a DSLR as long as 4K has been available. And when its here the codec is wrong..
Its at least a tiny bit funny imo
The reason is probably the same as always. Heat.
To shoot the 4K 422 the XC10 has a fan. And thats on a 1". I doubt many still photogs would want that. And by looking at the latest sales reports they are still the once in control. Canon still was at the top and I bet they want to stay there.
Personally I would just dump the 4K if I wanted the framerates that badly. HD upscale is still on par with 4K on youtube etc. TV is still 720p. Bla bla bla we know this already.
But it is true. 4K still is where 6K is today. Nice but not need.
 

mjpeg.... in 2016?!????
...REALLY????
like..... WHAT???!
i seriously thought that the 1dc would be the first and last canon body to shoot 4k mjpeg wth

@danreddingvideo You have all good old lenses there.  I have owned all of them and they all flare well.  In fact there's a ton of flaring in your video.  But you're looking for sharp long streaks, and if you want more then you need to look at other lenses.   The older lenses flare because of the old single-coating of the lenses.  But the drawback is that they have a more "smeared" effect and not the sharp lines you're looking for.  Those sharp lines occur more with double or more modern coating on lenses.  But that drawback is you need to have a very very bright lightsource, like the sun.  You can look at some old zooms, like the Tokina 28-80mm F2.8, Nikon 28-80mm F2.8, or something similar.  The more lens elements, the more flaring artifacts there is.  It's hard finding the right combination of taking lens with Anamorphic.
Here's an old test I did with my Kowa B&H 2x (Same as your Kowa 8z).  Strong lights will get the flares you're looking for.  
https://vimeo.com/108202883

Here's my model shoot, shot with Kowa 2x + Rangefinder.  It's very sharp F4/F5.6.  And be prepared for lots of flares!  SLR Magic is always going for that Panavision look with blue flares and streaks.  It's their lens coating design.

BOLD, I really salute you on this project.  I've been sitting on mine for awhile.  It's the focus and the handling that's just killing me.  And it's harder now that there are other single focus options available.  I hope that you can make something that really works.  I'll definitely buy the adapter, especially if you can 3D print it.
Here are pics of how I have mine mounted.  It's so hacked I don't know what to say.  It's definitely not stable, and I have a hard time with the follow focus too.  But the images are great as are the amazing flares!
 

Sankor can be had for as little as $150 on ebay.  If you're just starting out you don't need a mint one really.  And any of the 2x adapters are all similar.  Yes they are heavy and will strain the lens mount a little, but it really won't make a difference.  The speedbooster makes for a great mount and the Nikon lenses are old style metal housing which is really strong.  If anything you'll have a hard time focusing with the weight on the lens.  But you have to dual focus anyway (one for the Nikon, other for the Sankor).
 
Most projector lenses are a minimum of 40mm m4/3 (85mm full frame).  You still might get a vignette on the corners.  50mm w/ speedbooster on the GH4 4K will come out to around 85mm FF equivalent so you'll be right there.  If anything shoot with the new version 2.0 firmware for the GH4.  Then you can use the new Photo 4K modes, and if you shoot 1:1 (2880x2880 square) then you can stretch and crop the image using the center of the lens.  This will reduce the vignette quite a bit and maybe you can shoot wider.  You can look up Luke Neumann on youtube and see his quick tutorial on how to use the version 2.0 4K photo modes.

Chinese New Years 2014 - SLR Magic Anamorphot + Canon 5D mkIII RAW - Night Extended Footage
Any thoughts on 5D raw workflow, is it really so bad ? The results are breathtaking. 
In a week I'm buying a new camera but this 3years old mark3 produces jaw dropping images. I was set on GH4 but now.... 

No association with REDSTAN, other than a very happy customer!
I previously ordered a Vid Atlantic "kit".
When it arrived, I immediately noticed the set screws for the scope are metal.
Bummer.   
Shrug, proceeded to get it to mount, no success,
it doesn't fit either my Sankor 16F, nor my Kowa Bell & Howell.
I was really bummered out now.
Received the REDSTAN clamp, the first obvious thing when opening the package,
it is a PROPER qualitiy machined solution, NOT a hacked extension tube, as with the Vid Atlantic.
The quality difference is night and day.
Installing the REDSTAN clamp to my Kowa B&H, it was a perfect fit from the start.
And NO metal scope adjustment set screws!
I would think that most people here already know this information.
Just thought I'd share my experience for others who don't.
 

Kind of a Catch 22 situation going on here: Low Budget filmmakers want an all-in-one anamorphic, but they are difficult & costly to make.
Judging from their previous offerings, i just don't think SLR Magic are going to deliver something that's going to have enough of the WOW factor that people are looking for, at a price that they can afford or are willing to pay.
I agree with Rich here, if you're going to invest in an anamorphic lens, the Iscorama is still the go to adaptor/lens. Also, you've got to consider that by being able to pair them with different taking lenses, you can drastically change the look of your projects & so aren't stuck with one look specific look, but a variety.
The market place has just been blown wide open with the Rectilux Core DNA & the SLR Rangefinder, so now Dual Focus Anamorphics have become much more user friendly - shit, you could buy a couple or more & it'll still be cheaper.
I know that there aren't that many pre-36s or non-MC 36s out there, but the hype that they are the best Iscorama just does my nut in. Yes i've owned one & yes i sold it - I prefered the look of the Kowa for B&H, was prepared to endure the extra hassle & the extra cash in my pocket.
Just remember that you can get MC anamorphics to flare - in the recent-ish Star Trek film they shone really powerful torches/lights into them to really get the lenses to flare in a crisp over the top way. I recently encountered this with an MC lens whilst filming a concert & I wasn't even in control of the lighting! When i've got time, i'm going to try & demonstrate this, which will hopefully dispel some of these myths.
But having said all that, I do tip my hat to SLR Magic for actually making them & really hope that they have come up with the goods.