Julian

This is at a T/2.8 on a GH4 using a Kowa Bell & Howell with the Rectilux, followed by the SLR Magic Rangefinder. For each, I am seated as close as focus would allow. Forgive the sloppy alignment issues, I rushed this. Must get back to writing so i actually have a movie to use this stuff for...


also, if you're wondering which one looks more like the Kowa on it's own, it's the Rectilux. The Rangefinder adds warmth, blue flares/haze. Preference for either is left up to individual taste, I suppose.

Jordan Drake tweeted,
"Just got word from Panasonic, they will officially announce the GH4 V-Log L delivery date on Sept. 1! Stay tuned... #TCSTV "

sure would!
 

Plenty of stuff to cover indeed but I'll do my best to put together a thorough and informative review guys! For now I uploaded a short unboxing video on my blog page... now I better charge the batteries and catch some sleep, tomorrow is gonna be a busy day! :-)
 
 

Thinking about the smaller version of the Rangefinder...
You can call me crazy but... i was thinking that it could be useful for BMPCC users to use it with Nikon 1 lenses (especially the wide zoom 6,7-13mm).
Would it be possible?

I don't like the camera much (body design and control, no possibility for speed booster), I really prefer the G7 as a camera, but for $350... I can't argue

Hi Julian...
Thanks for the response. After a close family friend passed away years ago I arranged for the sale of his old Arriflex II-C camera, His Iscorama lens was given to me by his niece as a "thank you". I've used it for years, shooting slides, then shelved it when I "went digital". Several years ago I stumbled across the EOSHD website and it rekindled my interest in using it for digital work. It's only fairly recently that I've played around with it with the idea of adapting it for close-up shooting. I'm still not fully up to speed with it when working at close distances. The very shallow DOF at high magnifications is a problem, and working with mongrel supplementary lenses scavenged from junk lenses is "iffy" at times. There's a tremendous amount of variability in image quality when I mount add-on lenses on the Isco, depending upon which primary lens I'm using. Through quite a bit of testing I've created separate sets of supplementary lenses to work with the Isco when mounted on specific primary lenses. A few of my add-on lenses do vignette a bit, which is cropped away preserving the normal decompressed aspect ratio. I haven't run any focus / compression tests at anything closer than about three feet, but feel as you do, that if I leave the Isco at infinity there probably won't be a shift in the amount of "squeeze". 
Here are a few sample images, all taken using an old Nikkor-H 85mm f/1.8...  stopped down to f/16 or f/22, with a variety of supplemental lenses. The 85 and the Iscorama both have their focusing ring "locked" at infinity with wide rubber bands, focusing is achieved by moving the camera. Lighting is from either the pop-up flash, or a small speedlight bounced off foil covered cards or shot through a home-made bowl diffuser.

Forget-me-nots, 85mm Nikkor-H, Iscorama, objective from a junk Soligor 450mm reverse mounted on the Isco.
 

Orb weaver leg regeneration, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscorama, Soligor 450mm objective. I really like the bokeh here (out of focus evergreen branches).
 

Web repair, 85mm with Iscorama, Soligor 450mm objective reversed on the Isco, with a Soligor 90-230mm zoom lens objective reversed on the 450mm.
 

Bee, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscoama, with a Soligor 90-230mm objective reversed on the Isco, and a Panagor 85-205mm objective reversed on the Soligor.
 

Freshly moulted Funnel Weaver, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscorama, with the objective from a Vivitar 28-210mm zoom lens reversed on the Isco. 
 

Tiny fly, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscorama, and the objective from the Vivitar 28-210 reversed on the Isco.
 

Baby funnel weaver with a fruit fly, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscorama, and a Raynox MSN-202 close up lens on the Isco. This add-on lens is mounted on an adapter ring that fits the Isco, not in the "snap-on" adapter supplied by Raynox.
The results I've been getting with the Iscorama are very encouraging. It's been great for general photography, but seems to work well up close too. Shooting anamorphic macro images is great... but there are a huge amount of "throw-aways"... more than with using a macro lens without the Iscorama. Shooting extreme close-ups with the Isco is probably "pushing the envelope" a bit, but I'm getting enough decent images to keep me at it. I've been asked why I'm "wasting my time" with the old isco, and been advised that shooting wide angle and cropping might be easier. Having done that years ago... there's no comparison. I just like the look and feel of the anamorphic images better. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

damn, man! you forced my hand! I had an eye in that for a while, thinking if I would go deep into that mod project, and now I had to get it. hahaha. Well, I'm gonna be following your steps pretty close, please keep me updated on your findings, will you?

The Sunny f/16 rule is helpful to determine the approximate exposure for typical settings:
Sunny: f/16 - ISO 100 - 1/100
Overcast: f/8 - ISO 100 - 1/100
Sunset: f/4 - ISO 100 - 1/100
In your case, ISO 800 = 1/800. You want 1/48 (1/50), so you need 4 stops of ND to correct for the shutter speed. And 1 to 5 extra stops of ND to compensate for the aperture if you want to shoot at f/2.8.
3 + 6 sounds about right. Enough to tame the bright sunlight when you combine them, and good for overcast/sunset using them separately.

Gonna dig mine out and take some pics:)

Great review Andrew. I want one!
@Andrew - SLR Magic: Will it be available somewhere in Europe for the promotional price?

as you know, going to a T/.95, it will introduce some softness and purple fringing (this is true for the Sigma Art & SLR Magic taking lenses I have) so i typically stay at a T/2 or smaller aperture. in a low contrast scene where fringing might be less noticeable, those wide open apertures could work though. And of course, there are ways to remove purple fringing in post.
and yeah, the breathing is very much like how anamorphic lens from the 1970s would breath. for example, here's an example of how Lomos breath on focus pulls. the apparent change in "squeeze factor" is what is referred to as "anamorphic mumps". 

https://vimeo.com/96882585
 

It is so stunning that these old pieces of glass can still deliver so well. Remeber they were built nearly 60 years ago!!! The DV crap from Panasonic, Optex, Century is no match for
 most of them. The fact that 2x stretch is so rare depends on the low resolution of 8mm. There is also too much grain and that distorts as well. Therefore the Hypergonar was not good for 8mm: I never saw acceptable film with it.

Didn't know there is a 2x version. That would be even better on the GH4 in anamorphic mode!

I have been out shooting with the SLR Magic Rangefinder.
Key features:
It completely takes over focus from any prime lens Solves lens breathing (reduces to such low level it isn't noticeable) Adds cinema standard 240 degrees focus ring with FF gearing and hard stops Reduces minimum focus distance of all anamorphic lenses to 1m (even long-throw projector lenses) For those who shoot anamorphic especially this will be music to your ears. These shooters will also be familiar with diopters, which are used to correct aberrations and achieve very close focus. Effectively the SLR Magic Rangefinder is a variable diopter and thus a rather brilliant concept as it is capable of taking over focus from the taking lens entirely.
Read the full article

The Sunny f/16 rule is helpful to determine the approximate exposure for typical settings:
Sunny: f/16 - ISO 100 - 1/100
Overcast: f/8 - ISO 100 - 1/100
Sunset: f/4 - ISO 100 - 1/100
In your case, ISO 800 = 1/800. You want 1/48 (1/50), so you need 4 stops of ND to correct for the shutter speed. And 1 to 5 extra stops of ND to compensate for the aperture if you want to shoot at f/2.8.
3 + 6 sounds about right. Enough to tame the bright sunlight when you combine them, and good for overcast/sunset using them separately.

I love the Moller, I don't have one though. I'd pay a lot for it if it was single focus... I think it's the best baby for sure.
I'm the lucky owner of a Petit Cinevision. It's probably not the best baby in town, but I love this little lens. Since I picked it up in 2013 I have never seen one again and it is impossible to find something about it on Google. A real unicorn!

I really have to take my baby out sometime again...

Yes, the CineVision 8mm is a pretty wonderful lens.
Mine is not branded 'Petit' though...but it is the same tiny size. I've only ever seen the 2x versions appear on ebay once every year or so, the 1.5x model seems to be even more scarce. Below is old and boring video from mushy h264 from 7D, would really shine on a GH4 methinks.
Far right of this pic, shows how tiny it is

 

Canon RAW tends to be more pleasing out of the camera because it has more contrast and a less linear tonal response than Sony/Nikon RAW (except the D810). You can read more about the subject here: http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/03/18/understanding-native-tonal-response/

This is also hugely affected by your RAW converter, your choice of color profile, whether or not you profile your cameras, and your PP abilities in general. Given a flat RAW file shot with good technique, "nice contrast and color" is entirely in the hands of the photographer. 

Ming has also noticed a slight difference in color rendering across the tonal range in RAW files after profiling (as noted in his 5DS review), but he considers it too minor to make a difference in everyday shooting. 

Also, something to keep in mind: "better" is a dangerous and subjective word. Better for what? In what way? With what other drawbacks? At what price point? In what form factor? 

more anaMOREphic...
 
 

Hey Julian, your Petit Cinevision must be really one of the rarest anamorphic adapters out there and  I remember the discussion about it here on the forum back then... And YES - you should take it out as the image looks very good!  BTW the focusing with the Bolex-Möller is so easy because you can just grab both taking lens and the Möller and focus both at the same time. This works because the throw of the Möller from 1m to infinity is only about 90º (from 0.5 to 1m it is another 90º) But this doesn't work with Nikons of course... but great with Canon FD for example.

Here is The Rectilux 3FF-W with a 25mm from SLR Magic at T/2.8 on a GH4. I'm prepping for another feature in the next couple months and wanted to start making direct comparisons between the Kowa Bell & Howell and the Schneider ES Cinelux. First, I wanted to see CUs of an actor as well as some focus pulls. 
 
 
 
 

I love the Moller, I don't have one though. I'd pay a lot for it if it was single focus... I think it's the best baby for sure.
I'm the lucky owner of a Petit Cinevision. It's probably not the best baby in town, but I love this little lens. Since I picked it up in 2013 I have never seen one again and it is impossible to find something about it on Google. A real unicorn!

I really have to take my baby out sometime again...

I posted this in my other thread, but it's kind of hidden and not everyone would think of looking there. I've spent the past few weeks working on reviewing the Rectilux 3FF-W, paired with a Kowa B&H inside. Taking lenses are Contax Zeiss and an old Nikon which I regret picking up. Camera is the Canon 5D3, shooting RAW everytime.
There are charts, flares, vignetting and a real world test there. Check the video and a written review at http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7742
Subscribe to my channel (http://youtube.com/tferradans) for upcoming reviews and anamorphic content!

a few more clips. forgive the camera bounce on the focus pulls, I hadn't had my coffee yet.