QuickHitRecord

Thanks for sharing. I felt like this actually made a strong case for the Remus lenses! I found that look to be way more interesting. I'd still miss that 2x stretch though. You did a really nice job here. It's very closely matched! But I think it's the bokeh and the pincushion distortion that sells the effect for me. I think you've made a solid case to me for going with a more vanilla modern anamorphic lens (maybe a 1.8x) and dirtying it up in post. But at that price point, I think I'll rent on a project by project basis. The old school adapters are still inexpensive enough to own. I've discovered in my EOS-M that ML has a 1.175:1 aspect ratio available. With a 2x stretch, that's 2.35! It's very clean. Unfortunately the quality of the HDMI stream from this camera is pretty terrible and difficult to focus with, so I'll see if I can get the same thing from my 5Diii. Also, I spent way too much money ordering all of the parts for Lucas Pfaff's PFocus B anamorphic focuser with the hope that I could successfully assemble it and have a nice universal focuser for any cheap anamorphic adapter. However, I accidentally ordered it to be printed with 100% infill, so I fear that it's going to be a brick. But we'll see, maybe it will surprise me. If I did it again, I would only go this route if I had a 3D printer at home, or a friend who had one. From a cost standpoint, it doesn't make sense to order it from a site like Shapeways. @kyeHave you ever thought about purchasing a cheap 2x adapter? Given what I know of your aesthetic, I think you'd get pulled in!

It's a pretty subdued look, but I like it. I can't make out as many fine details as usual and I love when she's just a little out of focus. Also, I'm kind of over the horizontal flares. Nice shots. Especially the cows. Anamorphic projector attachments are definitely a way to burn up a lot of money on a whole lot of nothing. I could have made a down payment on a house with the amount I spent on them (though I did recoup some when selling). This time, if I end up buying anything, it will have to be pretty inexpensive. I can't look away from poor financial decisions as easily as I did in my younger days. I had a random memory of this test that I posted here 11 years ago. I never did anything with this combination. I should probably give it another shot. It's unique and I still have all of the components. And maybe there are better wide angle converters that will yield different results.

I'm looking around to find an example to explain this better. Most of what I'm seeing is too sharp. This is nice. I find that sometimes I actually like when anamorphic lenses having taking lenses that are focused just a little off. Here's my B&H single focus vs a Sirui 1.6x that I rented. I'd happily just stick with the B&H if I could go wider with it. I also like what I'm seeing from the Kowa 16D in terms of character, but it's not going to play well with a ~50mm lens either. That is a really nice lens. Very smooth bokeh, and a little CA in the bokeh wide open (which I quite like). I think those Voigtlanders are known for holding circular bokeh for longer when stopping down, a very nice characteristic for pairing with an anamorphic lens. I think you're onto something. Check out this video. Tropical was the wrong word. But it's super humid! I liked in Kobe for three years. I've owned the Helios three different times, and sold it. I just don't get along with that lens. If I can find a decent mod on a fast 35-50mm lens (with no streak), I'd consider it. From what I've seen, the mods still don't have the weirdness of true anamorphic. What Blazar is doing is really neat. I think they are doing it with their new Beetle lenses as well.

@Ninpo33Thanks for such a detailed response. It's good to know that there are still some out there making beautiful images with this old glass. I love the idea of Buyee for vintage lenses, but it never seems like it was more cost effective than just waiting it out on eBay. And that was before the tariffs. Plus, it seems like a lot of older glass imported from tropical climates has more fungus. How do you make it work for you? I can't find anything written about this. Is it as simple as unscrewing the back panel and popping out the anamorphic element? Seems like a steal compared to some of these other variable diopters. Are there any known limitations? Is that a YashicaScope? Would love to see some footage!

I'm looking around at the current anamorphic landscape and finding that while much easier to work with and capable of wider angles, the new offerings from Sirui, Blazar and Laowa lack the same jaw-dropping quality that footage from the older adapters had. I find them so clean (yes, even the Blazars) that I think that it defeats the point of shooting on anamorphic. So that brings me back to the vintage adapters, which seem to have come down in price since the modern lenses have hit the market. Plus there are now several variable diopters available for single focus. Going on character alone, what are your favorites? At one point or another, I've owned 10-20 different adapters, and I still have a modded Bell & Howell Single-Focus. But after an 11-year hiatus from anamorphic, I am looking for fresh perspectives.

Thanks for sharing. Are you sure these were made by Tokina and not Kino Precision? I bought that same 35mm f2.8 a few years ago. Within an hour of using it, the helicoid started to have some play in it. A few minutes later, the lens literally came apart in my hands (from completely normal use with my hands, no follow focus). I wasn't able to reassemble it. I think I've probably owned over 100 lenses at this point, and this was the first and only time this has ever happened to me. I hope yours are holding up better than mine did.

All of the above. I think that the lessening of detail forces my brain to "fill in the blanks", making it more of an interactive set for me. And I have an emotional response to an espresso machine, which I usually wouldn't. Curious, does the front element rotate when focusing on this? I've held the same position for years but lately I've been learning to like it. Hard-edged bokeh is one of the big differentiators between modern and vintage glass.

To me, these are my favorite images yet -- by a long shot. I may need to reconsider my position on vintage zooms!

I agree, but if you're trying to make a living doing this, those were a lot of billable hours that are not going to be available anymore. I had a potential client reach out about a project and I sent her a quote. I never heard back and later saw on their socials an AI version of said project. I'd like to hear more about your experience because I can't quite grasp what the revision process would be like. I assume that you adjust your prompts based on client feedback, but does the client ever tell you exactly what prompts to use? And rather than trying to communicate their ideas, do they ever just generate their own AI imagery? At that point, I think I might have a difficult time justifying why I would still need to be involved.

Last month, I officially lost my first (as far as I know) video job to AI. I'm sure it won't be the last.

I went away for the weekend and came back to find some cool posts on this thread! There are definitely benefits in terms of consistency. I still haven't been able to find a vintage zoom with a useful focal length that focuses in the right direction and doesn't have smeary bokeh. Also, I'm not a huge fan of the 12+ element stacked flares that usually come with those lenses. The best I've been able to find it he Olympus 35-70 f3.6 but I wouldn't call it a character lens. I saw this video about a year ago and tried to get one. I had a seller mislabel their listing and ended up with the variable aperture version. I was pretty irritated by this and it went into a drawer, only coming out when I dropped it off at Goodwill. I haven't looked again since. Or f4 on S35. Absolutely. That's a case for M43 that is seldom made. But it also kind of forces you into wide, expensive glass. At least for vintage lenses. It's a bit of a catch 22. Bought this one a couple of years ago. It wasn't for me. I was in agreement that it was the worst Nikon lens I'd ever tried. I found one of these with an M42 mount a few years ago. I really thought that it would scratch the itch but my copy was remarkably sharp. Amazing for the first zoom ever made. This is actually a pretty neat idea. It might also work with step-down rings. It could also be a good way to standardize light transmission between lenses. I think I'm going to try this.

I'm exploring the idea of assembling a set of "super slow" vintage primes with an f/stop of f/3.5 or slower for use on short films, personal projects, etc. Why super slow? Because I want the benefits of shooting wide open (circular bokeh & potentially softer image) without throwing the background totally out of focus. Plus, I've been trying to shoot at a deeper depth of field lately because it is a look that I find myself gravitating towards more and more. Plus, slow lenses shouldn't cost much and might even open up the opportunity to work with some real sleepers that no one really cares about these days. Ideally: Focal lengths: ~20mm, 28/35mm, 50/55/58mm, 85/105mm OR a super simple set like 24mm, 50/55mmm, 85/105mm f/3.5 or slower (preferably all the same f/stop) Same series of lens for consistency Preferred: Old and weird (single-coating, etc.) Adaptable to Canon EF mount Focuses the "right away" (focus scale to the left of infinity) Readily available and under $200/each Does anyone have any recommendations?

It's exceedingly rare that a client will ask for an aesthetic that allows me to dust off my vintage lenses. And on the passion project side, I've shot four of five of my last narrative shorts with Canon zooms. The next one will be with a Canon zoom as well. That decision was based on speed, convenience, and the fact that I trust modern AF much more than a friend who has been given an hour of instruction on pulling focus, changing lenses, and calibrating motors. Of course, I'd rather have a professional 1st AC and some more interesting lenses. But there aren't that many of them around anymore (at least not in my market) and the pros that we do have usually don't want to cut their rates to work on a no-budget film. It's the same reason that I sold my RED cameras. They just weren't getting any use.

I always enjoy your posts, Kye. Threads like this are keeping this forum alive. This new Resolve plugin seems relevant to the discussion. I just downloaded a copy of this last night and had a play. It can't really affect bokeh much without a depth map (as shown, you can have AI generate one for you in Resolve), but even without it, the other characteristics can help create a unique aesthetic. It's a handy tool to have for those projects that won't allow for real vintage glass to be used -- which at least for me, seems to be most of them these days.

Thanks for the heads up. Maybe the new LP-E6P batteries are the way to go. How many do you typically find that you'll use up in a day? Is the LCD bright enough to use outdoors in the sun? I've had no problem using my C70's LCD on all but the very brightest days.

I have a lot of respect for the skill involved with shooting weddings. I did two about ten years ago and decided that it wasn't for me! Yeah, no thanks. I appreciate you mentioning that. I'm not willing to take that risk! I bit the bullet and ordered a used R5C. $2400 a 22K shutter count, and a cage included. I don't expect this to become my primary camera over the C70 but will be nice to have when photos are also needed. I think I might re-buy the SmallRig v-mount plate so that I can power it off of my Intellytech mini v-mounts, and then just uncouple it from that setup and run it off of the regular battery for stills (I really like an EVF for stills). In the interest of keeping things small and lightweight, I probably will not bother with a separate monitor.

[DELETE]

I don't know how you wedding shooters routinely manage these kinds of logistics! This is interesting. Thank you for sharing! I hadn't really considered the R7 because I don't love the way that Canon has implemented an all-or-nothing approach to IBIS and IS. But I didn't realize that it was actually pretty good on the overheating front. It's worth a second look. Since you own both the R5C and the R8, is the 24P 4K from the R5C that much better? Is the DPAF better on the R8? And is there a way temporarily disable autofocus on the R8 by holding down a button? Good to know!

Interesting. Though for narrative, there are lots of long breaks. There are breaks during the b-roll I shoot too, but I'm often in the hot sun. I'm kind of tempted to give the R8 a try. Josh Sattin's videos suggest that it can roll for over two hours continuously in 24P. That goes down significantly in 60P, but I tend to shoot about 70% of my b-roll in 24P. I've been trying to do the same. Four years ago, I was lugging around a pair of 575w HMIs(!). Now I have a rule that if a client wants more than what I can fit on my cart, they need to budget for my gaffer too. But getting hired for photo + video is always a problem for me because it means multiple bodies, multiple lenses, etc. I've held off because I don't think the quality is really there, but at this point I am willing to make some sacrifices.

Other than the pricey R5C, of course. Also, I don't think my EOS-R has ever overheated. But it has a significant crop. Maybe the 1D-C, 1D-X ii or iii? I don't care about 30-min recording time limits. This would only be for b-roll and photos. Asking because I almost blacked out during a paid video + photo shoot out in the sun today. When I came home and weighed the gear I was hauling around (rigged up C70, EOS-R, tripod, lenses, batteries), it was 32lbs. I can't put this off anymore. It's time for a hybrid. And yes, I am too invested in Canon to consider any mount other than RF or EF.

Not pictured: the Lumix FZ47.

Brought mine along on my honeymoon in Ecuador a few years ago. Kind of a slow camera to work with and not my usual keeper rate, but I do like the shots that I was able to get:

I kind of agree with the original post in that we have lost something. But I also wonder if that "something" was the innocence of youth. I remember being completely immersed in the blockbusters of the 1990s as a kid. It takes a lot to even approach that feeling decades later. Nostalgia is a powerful thing. I remember watching Phantom Thread (2017) for the first time. I was completely immersed by the understated beauty of the visuals. When I looked to see what camera they had used, it was Kodak Vision3 200T and 500T. That being said, I've generally been ditching the multi-node grading workflows of Resolve in favor of simple global adjustments in Premiere (my native platform). No windows, which were not readily available in the days of celluloid. The resulting images have an honesty to them and don't seem to by vying for anyone's attention.

Someone on this forum is actually producing work and putting it out into the world?! I had to watch and I am glad that I did. I thought that the visuals and editing were really nice. I loved the energy you created in the opening; it was riveting right off the bat. Hal is a memorable and interesting character. I tend to think of raptors as generally solitary so seeing such a magnificent series of "rivers" was a real treat -- I had no idea. I am by no means a wildlife documentarian, but I'd like to offer a little critique. You've got a great setup but then I was waiting for an obstacle. Something that raises the stakes. Is the solar farm or other development being pushed through? What happens when Hal steps down? Or (and I really hope that this doesn't happen), what effect will the new strain of avian flu have on these birds? I think it might be worth keeping in touch with these folks because any one of those scenarios would add the drama that a piece like this needs to get into the bigger festivals or broadcast. Or if it just doesn't look like the story will evolve much more (or you're just ready to move onto the next thing), I'd recommend cutting it down to a very tight 20-25 minutes. Maybe the climax is when the influx of birders come out in response to the email. There was good tension in that scene, like the citizen scientists were about to lose control of the mob. Now a couple of questions. I saw in another post that you shot this with something like a dozen different cameras. What was the reason for that? Did any of them prove to be particularly documentary-friendly? It seemed like you had a LOT of people wearing lav mics and you caught some really choice soundbytes that added a lot to your story. What was your approach to audio? And how many times would you say that you've been out there for a shoot? One last thing. The screener was only in 480P but that didn't stop the story from coming through at all. 4K be damned. Great job on this and thanks for sharing. It was the most compelling share I've seen here in quite a while!

I've cycled through a lot of cameras to get here (including Blackmagic, Sony, and two REDs) and ended up selling off about a dozen cameras last year. I think I'm finally happy. I can't think of anything else that I really want and I haven't purchased a camera in almost two years, which is a record for me: WORK/DOCUMENTARY/NARRATIVE CAMERAS Canon C70 x2 FUN/EXPERIMENTAL CAMERAS Canon 5Diii with ML Canon EOS-M with ML Lumix GH1 (hacked) Lumix FZ47 STILLS CAMERAS Canon EOS-R Olympus E500 Fujifilm E900 Canon Elan (Film) If I could snap my fingers and add a camera to this list, it would be the Ikonoskop A-Cam. Or, I'd probably buy an Octopus16 if they ever get around to releasing it.