nahua

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

Kind of reminds me of this:
 
 
Great stuff!

Rodney Charters, highly regarded director and cinematographer, talks about using the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera side-by-side with an Alexa, what 4K acquisition means in "his" world as a high-end cinematographer, and his love for the Alexa, and what it makes this camera special.

Permissions are usually expensive and a headache. Try gorilla shooting but remember: 1. Keep cast and crew small and inconspicuous. 2. Don't take hours to finish any scene. Elaborate scenes should be shot inside/ indoors. 3. Rehearse. 4. Don't carry equipment outside that draws too much attention. Just a  single camera with hidden lapel kics with wireless kindda recorders.  5. There should always be a production guy who can handle the cops. Also everyone should scoot while he does that. 6. Tiny handheld stabilizer like the Nebula 4000 or extreme wide lenses and a steady hand. B
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Got the final chapters done, but can't edit the main post! Are we gonna be able to edit stuff again, or is this a permanent change?
c ) WORKFLOWhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7370 CONCLUSIONhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7371BIBLIOGRAPHYhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7372 *weirdly enough, I was able to edit THIS post...

It's more an aesthetic choice than anything. While you can fake the look (poorly) using string and an oval aperture cut-out, the flares, distortion, and character of the image don't really look the same. Then again, eBay adapters don't really look like Panavision anamorphic lenses, either.
But it's always been an aesthetic choice (at last in recent history). Look at how much was shot in 2.35:1 two perf as an alternative to anamorphic in the 90s and oughts. Michael Bay is an interesting example... shot Bad Boys II in 2.35:1 spherical then moved to anamorphic exclusively until he switched to shooting on both digital and film. Some DPs don't like the unnatural look of anamorphic lenses (Roger Deakins never uses them, while he does shoot 2.35:1 at times); some directors just like the nostalgia (JJ Abrams). There's a bit more resolution, sure, and a finer grain structure on film, but it's primarily an esthetic choice, rather than a technical one, and has been for decades.
When digital became popular, it was difficult to shoot anamorphic because of the 16:9 sensor size resulting in a 3.5:1 image, so shooting anamorphic became rarer on digital formats and perceived as more "high end." Every element of anamorphic has a totally different look, from the bokeh, to the distortion, to the flares, and some directors (Anthony Mandler) even embraced the 3.5:1 look. Meanwhile only the Alexa Plus has a 4:3 sensor so between renting that and anamorphic lenses you're spending a lot of money. So it's a way to make your production look high end... check out the new Total Recall (Epic) and Ninja Turtles movies to see digital anamorphic photography on high end CGI-filled features. Check out the Lego Movie (or, Wall•E) to see an anamorphic look on pure CGI... total aesthetic choice here, but it makes it look more "real" and more high end. The weird lens artifacts take off a bit of digital sterility.
On the ultra low end hobbyist side, the Iscorama (still hoping to buy one) seems particularly nice because it gives you 2.6:1 and lets you focus and use a variety of lenses, but we'd all rather be using an Alexa Plus and Panavision lenses in theory. But anamorphic could give you the right look for the right project. If I'm doing a Spielberg 80s homage like Super 8 or something I'd much rather be shooting anamorphic. If a director wants it you should be able to provide it. If you're the director and you don't care, yeah, pass. I think the 1.33:1 adapters seem odd.
Treat it as an aesthetic choice, not a technical one. Ultimately, every choice is.
Fwiw, a lot of anamorphics are decently sharp at t2.8. And sharp isn't always the goal. 1080p is enough resolution to let you focus on texture and grain, not just crispness. If you watch the Dark Knight blu ray (not my favorite movie, but whatever) you can see that the IMAX portions are way sharper than the anamorphic portions even at 1080p! But the anamorphic photography has a good look. Very organic. Those are some nice looking movies. Kaminski doesn't shoot anamorphic (at least not much that I know of) but he softens and distorts the image in a really organic way through other means while still getting a sharp enough image for projection and blu ray.

Shot this tonight - frame grabs:
http://eddavid.tumblr.com/post/107859567039/screengrabs-from-upcoming-film-shot-on-samsung-nx1
http://eddavid.tumblr.com/post/107859626819/screengrabs-from-upcoming-film-shot-on-samsung-nx1
http://eddavid.tumblr.com/post/107859682869/screengrabs-from-upcoming-film-shot-on-samsung-nx1
Very excited by it's night capabilities.
 
and in two weeks with the new firmware - will be even more amazing.
added grain and heavy grading.
 

On my first shoot with the Sony FS7 - I was very impressed with the image out the camera and the ergonomics, but I was very disappointed with the performance of the firmware. It was slow, glitchy and hard to use. (The video is out Jan 29th - edit this week). 
I chose the FS7 again for another shoot as the client was adamant on 4k and slow motion. I agreed and received a brand new unit from my rental provider. Things were a bit different this time, as the body had the extension unit and battery bolted onto the back, plus a Vocas railing system underneath. I chose ProMist filters to diffuse the skin of our lady pop star with a matte box, locked off on a Satchler tripod. 
I shot the video in XAVC-I 4k 25fps and slow motion in 1080 150fps, SLog3. I had plenty of lighting such as Kino Flo, Arri and Dedolights so I could light the vast location which was a decadent seaside theatre room. 
I have to say, the dynamic range wowed me even more. Lighting the large interior was a smooth process. Detail is very impressive. The zebras and peaking are very good. Noise looks minimal. Motion cadence however does look a little 'video', although I can't judge this fully until the grade. 
Handling the camera was fine on the tripod, as expected. An annoying issue with the extension unit is that it gets in the way of the HDMI port. You have to really force it. We didn't get it to work in the end. May have been an issue elsewhere, so we used the very good LCD throughout. 
Firmware wise - the camera performed better than before. I'm not sure if the unit before was a bit faulty, as it was slow and crashed a lot. Still - it wasn't as responsive as I'd expect. The menus are dreadful and over complicated, it takes so much time just to change the most simple settings. As a user experience - the firmware performance and user experience is very poor. I've got used to it, but it really does need a complete overhaul. 
The button layout on the side of the camera is also slow and fiddly. They really need to come up with a modernised way of button layouts on these types of cameras. Finding where to play a clip was a nightmare, until I found a little button called 'Thumbnail.' Not the best name! 
Another issue was the Speedbooster. Changing aperture on an EF lens was terrible, as the aperture setting would go crazy and go from f2 to f16 with a slight dial. Metabones and Sony need to chat. 
With these issues aside, the camera is great to shoot with and delivers a lovely image. It makes the FS700 look like a toy. For the money, it is fantastic. I much prefer using this camera compared to a RED Epic and Blackmagic CC. I do miss the quicker setup times with a DSLR/DSLM camera, but you gain quality features for a better picture. 
I will definitely use it again and can't wait to edit the 2 music videos I've shot. When they are released, I will share! 
Here is me and the camera: 
 

Here are stills from my upcoming short film "Dueling Alphas".  Shot with GH4 4K (firmware 1.0) with Iscorama 36.

FM Lens + Cinelux ES + Olympus OM 85MM @ f.2

Canon 5D3 + Iscorama pre-36 VD + Helios 44-2 at f/4

Canon 5D3 + Kowa B&H + Jupiter 9 at f/2

Great fotos and stills! Although I am the worst photographer on the forum (internet?) I dare to post some images
Canon FDn 50mm (plus cheapbooster) and mighty-little-8mm Moeller

Canon FDn 28mm and 1968 Exakta Iscorama

Schneider Kreuznach Optivaron and  late 70's Iscorama 54 (obvisously not MC)

I just tried the UV filter in the 50mm super takumar prime lens and mi cinelux 1 with FM is MUCH BETER AND BIGGER flares, thank you Hans for the advise.

Here are stills from my upcoming short film "Dueling Alphas".  Shot with GH4 4K (firmware 1.0) with Iscorama 36.

Looks better than that Drive movie.  Great visuals, like something from the 70's or early 80's!

Here are stills from my upcoming short film "Dueling Alphas".  Shot with GH4 4K (firmware 1.0) with Iscorama 36.

Here are stills from my upcoming short film "Dueling Alphas".  Shot with GH4 4K (firmware 1.0) with Iscorama 36.

​
cheers.
I think the main strength of the shot is in the framing.  we were walking up the hill along a path and the pathway was the perfect width for the shot.  the look comes from the use of a 50mm f1.8 wide open on a apc-s sensor. - being a crop sensor the best portion of the 50mm was used and less of the edge smear at f1.8 was captured.  the iscorama then provided the extra width that would normally be there with a full frame sensor, cropped.
 
I was also pretty lucky with the light.  it was just getting dark and i was forced to shoot at 1/50th sec - providing a cinematic single frame look.  
 
the processing involved just correcting wb and doing a grade in rgb curves.  the scene looked very similar to this when we were there.  I think I pulled up exposure on the face to make him pop a bit.

​indeed.  It's a rama 36 on a zeiss 50mm f1.8  I find the thing the Iscorama does best is still photography.  it;s so compact and on a fast 50mm on APS-c it;s a beautiful combo.  I just wish the Leica Iscorama 2004 were cheaper!!!!!

Nice tip there Hans, thanks for sharing it, that's what I got using Focus Module Isco animex olympus OM 100mm combo from different light source.
I am going to try with the UV filter in the rear.

Hi guys....been away with work recently so not many posts from me recently.
After a discussion with richg101 I decided to test the theory that introducing more optical faces into the Cinelux would result in nicer contrast and flares.
So I mounted a 72mm cheap UV filter to the rear of the Cinelux and as you can see...it helps considerably by introducing internal reflection. It Should also help intensify other similar lenses (ultrastar etc) - although I don't have mine anymore to test.
Very useful for those who are disappointed by the lackluster flares often found with these MC optics.
 
 
 
 
 

Here are a bunch of randoms...  First 2 are Lomo, the rest are all iscorama pre36.







 

The 'look' is shallower depth of field. This is most relevant with medium wide angles. You can't reproduce the look of a 35mm f/1.4 on fullframe on a smaller sensor. To get the same look (when shooting the same subject, from the same distant, with the same framing), you would need something like a 23mm f/1.0. This lens does not exist for aps-c and if it would, it would be crazy expensive.
This article gives nice examples, comparing Fujifilm aps-c to fullframe: http://andrewvanbeek.com/fuji-x-lenses-and-full-frame/
It's about photography, but applies to video too.
Also, full frame sensors generate less noise and typically have better dynamic range. But this isn't usually what people refer to when mentioning the full frame look.
Important point: you don't need the full frame look to get the 'cinema' look, since most professional film cameras are using a S35 sensor, which is the same as aps-c. On top of that, most films are not shot at wide apertures like f/1.4 because it's very difficult to keep an actor in focus with a super small depth of field.

 

The reason why there's not a lot of info on how to get good footage straight from the camera is because lighting is always variable from shot to shot.  You could set up something ideal for a building in 9 am sunlight that would look terrible @1pm.  The shadows shift, there's more blacks in one shot, less in another.  When you shoot with post grading in mind you source your stuff kind of generically --knowing you have flexibility afterwards.
Ultimately, the most viable solution for you is to find some sort of personally-created balance on the shots to find an acceptable compromise.  That's totally subjective on you, so it's difficult finding that sort of answer online.
I've done this on my Lumix using STD and then dialing in my contrast and color to what I think looks best for my subject matter.  The good news is that you have 3 Custom settings you can create.  Using this you can make color options for 3 different scenarios you typically encounter and dial in the best color/contrast for each.  i.e.: Morning C1, Afternoon C2, DeepShadows C3, whatever...