Julian

this is sweet tiny easy peezy anamorphic.
1962-64 vintage simple design less smearing than iscormorphot potential to be much sharper.
like the baby hypergonar using it with a low power achromatic diopter will take this to another level.
 
 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Izukar-scope-x1-5-ANAMORPHIC-LENS-/300891246344?

just had a quick flick through this thread so i might have missed it,... but incase it hasnt been mentioned, there is this that might be of some use to you guys:
 
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p9kkgjwEQQQ-HJwvNDobeEw

http://youtu.be/nenH4wFkTL0
 
this is my entry for a competition at a local tv channel. the shigascope with a takumar taking lens on a Nikon V1. 
 
my first complete bit of video since i started playing with video in september.
 
and i came in second  :D ! so it's now being aired once a week for the next year. ( i would have rathered the cash value as a prize but oh well)
 
a friend told me about the competition 2 weeks before the deadline, a bunch of us got together and shot it in an afternoon,... cut together without knowing what i was doing,.. still dont really know  :P
 
for those that dont speak japanese,... the competition is called Furusato which roughly translates to hometown and is intended for locals to promote their hometown. 
 
since i'm not originally from here i decided to make it about the foreigners/non-locals who have chosen to make this city their home.
 
it got projected in a movie theatre for the awards ceremony,...
 
the brilliant thing is that everyone else shot regular aspect ratio stuff,... so their videos occupied the middle area of the screen,... 
 
when mine came on,... it was like 'boom!' filing the screen, lighting up the room,.. was so cool. 
 
actually no thats not the brilliant thing,.. the brilliant thing is that people thought i shot this on a massive camera. i bet they think i was being a dick and lieing to them when i said it was a nikon v1 :P
 
that is all for now  :)

Come one guys... Don't make it harder than it is. The numbers are there. The sensor size is known (in the specsheet on the Blackmagic website), so is the crop factor! There is no doubt about it.
 
Of course the cropfactor is measured from fullframe camera's, because the term cropfactor comes from the photography world I suppose. We all know what the cropfactor of 2x means for MFT, or what the cropfactor of 1.6x means for our Canons (and 1.5x for Nikon dslrs).
 
So lets stick to the standard that a fullframe camera with a 36x24mm sized sensor has a cropfactor of 1x.
The cropfactor is determined by the diagonal of the sensor. In video mode the aspect ratio is 16:9 instead of 3:2, so the active sensor area is 36 x 20.25mm for fullframe.
 
The math:
 
Fullframe (5D Mark III): Active sensor area 36 x 20.25 mm, diagonal of 41,30mm.
Blackmagic Pocket: Active sensor area 12,48 x 7,02 mm, diagonal is 14.32 mm.
 
Divide 41.30 by 14.32 = 2,88. So the cropfactor (in relation to a 35mm fulframe dslr) is 2,88x. Fact.
 
his data is what the test is based on and I don't have any reason to believe it is incorrect. Science just prohibits from Blackmagic from changing anything to this fact. Or the Pocket must have a built in a Speed Booster... but it doesn't.
 
Lets just accept that the cropfactor is 2.88x, at least till someone can prove otherwise. The people mailing answers like 'we don't know the technical details yet' aren't very technical I suppose. I'm not a professor either, but this is all very basic stuff and the sensor size is in the spec sheet, so the cropfactor is know.
 
Sorry, It just frustrates me that people get all confused over this.. The way Blackmagic is answering to those questions doesn't help a lot either.

https://vimeo.com/63892665
 
Things that stand out...
 
Compressed raw will likely come to the 2.5K camera, with firmware update Firmware on the Pocket Cinema Camera is identical to BMCC, only sensor part is different (debayering etc.) They hope to do a Quicktime wrapper for Cinema DNG making it easier to edit. Raw frames in Quicktime MOV!  
All very positive stuff and I like how knowledgable and engineering lead their CEO is. Not a business strategist but a proper technical man with ideas.

BINGO!!!......list of 321 c mount lenses ...
 
yes THREE HUNDRED AND TWENTY ONE!!
http://us.c-mount.passion.pro/
 
Julian we have alot of lenses to test!!

Come one guys... Don't make it harder than it is. The numbers are there. The sensor size is known (in the specsheet on the Blackmagic website), so is the crop factor! There is no doubt about it.
 
Of course the cropfactor is measured from fullframe camera's, because the term cropfactor comes from the photography world I suppose. We all know what the cropfactor of 2x means for MFT, or what the cropfactor of 1.6x means for our Canons (and 1.5x for Nikon dslrs).
 
So lets stick to the standard that a fullframe camera with a 36x24mm sized sensor has a cropfactor of 1x.
The cropfactor is determined by the diagonal of the sensor. In video mode the aspect ratio is 16:9 instead of 3:2, so the active sensor area is 36 x 20.25mm for fullframe.
 
The math:
 
Fullframe (5D Mark III): Active sensor area 36 x 20.25 mm, diagonal of 41,30mm.
Blackmagic Pocket: Active sensor area 12,48 x 7,02 mm, diagonal is 14.32 mm.
 
Divide 41.30 by 14.32 = 2,88. So the cropfactor (in relation to a 35mm fulframe dslr) is 2,88x. Fact.
 
his data is what the test is based on and I don't have any reason to believe it is incorrect. Science just prohibits from Blackmagic from changing anything to this fact. Or the Pocket must have a built in a Speed Booster... but it doesn't.
 
Lets just accept that the cropfactor is 2.88x, at least till someone can prove otherwise. The people mailing answers like 'we don't know the technical details yet' aren't very technical I suppose. I'm not a professor either, but this is all very basic stuff and the sensor size is in the spec sheet, so the cropfactor is know.
 
Sorry, It just frustrates me that people get all confused over this.. The way Blackmagic is answering to those questions doesn't help a lot either.

I think you have to decide for yourself what is most important.
 
Image Quality: BMPCC probably wins big time with the dynamic range and the raw editing options - But the GH3 is still very good
Ease of use: GH3 - Flip-screen, oled viewfinder, lots of buttons, touch screen. Reasonable file sizes
Lens flexibility: Both pretty flexible, GH3 wins because finding good wide angles or bright standard lenses for the BMPCC is going to be more difficult (and expensive) with the 3x cropfactor.
 
The GH3 is a much more complete camera than the BMPCC. The Pocket is just the cheapest way to get raw footage.

That statement doesn't make any sense. If what you are trying to say is that you can't get shallow DOF from s16 mm then that's patently untrue, not crazy shallow like FF, but still possible. It all depends on lens size, distance from your subject and aperture.
In fact I bet 95% of people slagging off s16mm sensors have never even worked with the medium........ But you know what they say "got a 5D, you're a DOP".

Hacked GH1 is best option for $350.
 
GH2 won't be that cheap!

550D is OK but GH1 has less moire and aliasing, rotating screen, mirrorless lens mount for a wider variety of lenses and the hack.

Eagerly awaiting your Pocket Cinema Camera? You already have a micro for thirds camera and some C-mount lenses? Want to know if they will cover the sensor of the Pocket? Lets find out! I hope you will add your results, so we can make this list growing.
 
I will only add lenses to the lists when you have proof, in other words: images.
 
How?

Because we know the active sensor area of the BMPCC measures 12,48 x 7,02 mm, it is fairly easy to check if our C-mount lenses will cover the full sensor. Calculate this by taking a picture with a lens on your micro four thirds camera, and crop out the image area of theBMPCC.
 


In Photoshop:
Open the image. Go to Edit > Image Size, uncheck resample image. Change Image width to 19 centimeters, press ok Go to Image > Canvas Size, change dimensions to 12,48 x 7,02cm, press OK to crop the image to BMPCC size. Resize to 1920x1080 pixels Post your results! Note: If you shoot on the GH3 or other MFT camera's, the sensor size is 17 x 13mm, so change the width in step 3 to 17 cm!

To lazy to do it yourself or you can't work it out? Upload the full resolution files and I'll do it.

List terms explained:

Yes = covers the full sensor of the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera
No = doesn't cover the sensor
Needs modification = Doesn't fit on C-mount to M43-adapter without modifications
Equivalent = The focal length and depth equivalent on a fullframe camera (5D Mark III for example)

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera Compatibility list

Primes
 
Apollo 25mm f/0.85 - Yes = 72mm f/2.4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Angenieux 10mm f/1.8 Retrofocus (Fixed Focus) - Yes (dark corners) = 28,8mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof] [more info]
 
Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 10mm f/2 - Yes - Needs modification = 28,8mm f/5.8 equivalent [link to proof] [more info]
Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 35mm f/1.9 - Yes - Needs modification = 101mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Century 9mm f/1.8 - YES (poor quality) [link to proof]
 
Computar 8mm f/1.3 - NO [link to proof]
Computar 16mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
Computar TV Lens 25mm f/1.8 - YES = 72mm f/5,2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Cosmicar 8,5mm f/1.5 - NO [link to proof]
Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.8 - YES - Needs modification = 36mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
Cosmicar 25mm f/1.8 - YES - 72mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]

Ernitec 6.5mm f/1.8 - YES (heavy distortion) [link to proof]
Ernitec/Navitar 17mm f/0.95 - YES (v. blurry corners & distortion) [link to proof]
 
Fujinon TV 12.5mm f/1.4 - Yes (blurry corners) - Mod.? (unknown) = 36mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
Fujinon TV 16mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
Fujinon TV 35mm f/1.7 - YES - Needs modification = 101mm f/4.9 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Leitz Macro Cinegon 10mm f/1.8 - Yes (dark corners) = 28,8mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Kern Switar 10mm f/1.6 - Yes (slight vignette & blurry corners) [link to proof]
 
Nikon Cine Nikkor 13mm f/1.8 - Yes =  37,5mm f/5.2 [link to proof]
Nikon Cine Nikkor 25mm f/1.8 - Yes = 72mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Pentax 25mm f/1.4 - YES - 72mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Schneider 10mm f/1.8 (silver version) - No (almost) [link to proof]
Schneider-Kreuznach Cinegon 11.5mm f/1.9 - No (almost) = 33mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 16mm f/2 - Yes = 46mm f/5.8 equivalent [link to proof] [link to proof (2)]
Schneider-Kreuznach Xenon 25mm f/0.95 - Yes = 72mm f/2.7 equivalent [link to proof]
Schneider Xenoplan 17mm f/1.7 - Yes (blurry corners) - [link to proof]
 
SLR Magic 11mm F1.4 - Yes - [link to proof] (added by EOSHD)
 
Tokina TV Lens  8mm f/1.3 - NO [link to proof]
Tokina TV Lens 16mm f/1.6 - NO [link to proof]
 
Taylor-Hobson Cooke Kinic 25mm f/1.3 - Yes = 72mm f/3.7 equivalent [link to proof]
Taylor-Hobson 25mm f/1.9 - Yes - 72mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Wesley 25mm f/1.4 - YES = 72mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Wollensak Cine Raptar 12.5mm f/1.5 - Yes = 36mm f/4.3 equivalent [link to proof]
Wollensak Cine Raptar 25mm f/1.9 - Yes = 72mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]

$ 25 noname 25mm f/1.2 CCTV - YES = 72mm f/3.5 equivalent [link to proof]

Zooms
 
Ernitec 6-12mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
 
Kowa TV Zoom 12.5-75mm f/1.8 - NO [link to proof]

Andy Lee sent me some files, I cropped them and added them to the list. Thanks Andy!
All shot fully wide open apeture on Panasonic GH2 with nostalgic profile.
 
Computar 16mm f/1.4

 
Cosmicar 25mm f/1.8

 
Pentax 25mm f/1.4

 
Wesley 25mm f/1.4

 
Ernitec 6-12mm f/1.4

Eagerly awaiting your Pocket Cinema Camera? You already have a micro for thirds camera and some C-mount lenses? Want to know if they will cover the sensor of the Pocket? Lets find out! I hope you will add your results, so we can make this list growing.
 
I will only add lenses to the lists when you have proof, in other words: images.
 
How?

Because we know the active sensor area of the BMPCC measures 12,48 x 7,02 mm, it is fairly easy to check if our C-mount lenses will cover the full sensor. Calculate this by taking a picture with a lens on your micro four thirds camera, and crop out the image area of theBMPCC.
 


In Photoshop:
Open the image. Go to Edit > Image Size, uncheck resample image. Change Image width to 19 centimeters, press ok Go to Image > Canvas Size, change dimensions to 12,48 x 7,02cm, press OK to crop the image to BMPCC size. Resize to 1920x1080 pixels Post your results! Note: If you shoot on the GH3 or other MFT camera's, the sensor size is 17 x 13mm, so change the width in step 3 to 17 cm!

To lazy to do it yourself or you can't work it out? Upload the full resolution files and I'll do it.

List terms explained:

Yes = covers the full sensor of the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera
No = doesn't cover the sensor
Needs modification = Doesn't fit on C-mount to M43-adapter without modifications
Equivalent = The focal length and depth equivalent on a fullframe camera (5D Mark III for example)

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera Compatibility list

Primes
 
Apollo 25mm f/0.85 - Yes = 72mm f/2.4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Angenieux 10mm f/1.8 Retrofocus (Fixed Focus) - Yes (dark corners) = 28,8mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof] [more info]
 
Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 10mm f/2 - Yes - Needs modification = 28,8mm f/5.8 equivalent [link to proof] [more info]
Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 35mm f/1.9 - Yes - Needs modification = 101mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Century 9mm f/1.8 - YES (poor quality) [link to proof]
 
Computar 8mm f/1.3 - NO [link to proof]
Computar 16mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
Computar TV Lens 25mm f/1.8 - YES = 72mm f/5,2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Cosmicar 8,5mm f/1.5 - NO [link to proof]
Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.8 - YES - Needs modification = 36mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
Cosmicar 25mm f/1.8 - YES - 72mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]

Ernitec 6.5mm f/1.8 - YES (heavy distortion) [link to proof]
Ernitec/Navitar 17mm f/0.95 - YES (v. blurry corners & distortion) [link to proof]
 
Fujinon TV 12.5mm f/1.4 - Yes (blurry corners) - Mod.? (unknown) = 36mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
Fujinon TV 16mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
Fujinon TV 35mm f/1.7 - YES - Needs modification = 101mm f/4.9 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Leitz Macro Cinegon 10mm f/1.8 - Yes (dark corners) = 28,8mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Kern Switar 10mm f/1.6 - Yes (slight vignette & blurry corners) [link to proof]
 
Nikon Cine Nikkor 13mm f/1.8 - Yes =  37,5mm f/5.2 [link to proof]
Nikon Cine Nikkor 25mm f/1.8 - Yes = 72mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Pentax 25mm f/1.4 - YES - 72mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Schneider 10mm f/1.8 (silver version) - No (almost) [link to proof]
Schneider-Kreuznach Cinegon 11.5mm f/1.9 - No (almost) = 33mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 16mm f/2 - Yes = 46mm f/5.8 equivalent [link to proof] [link to proof (2)]
Schneider-Kreuznach Xenon 25mm f/0.95 - Yes = 72mm f/2.7 equivalent [link to proof]
Schneider Xenoplan 17mm f/1.7 - Yes (blurry corners) - [link to proof]
 
SLR Magic 11mm F1.4 - Yes - [link to proof] (added by EOSHD)
 
Tokina TV Lens  8mm f/1.3 - NO [link to proof]
Tokina TV Lens 16mm f/1.6 - NO [link to proof]
 
Taylor-Hobson Cooke Kinic 25mm f/1.3 - Yes = 72mm f/3.7 equivalent [link to proof]
Taylor-Hobson 25mm f/1.9 - Yes - 72mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Wesley 25mm f/1.4 - YES = 72mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Wollensak Cine Raptar 12.5mm f/1.5 - Yes = 36mm f/4.3 equivalent [link to proof]
Wollensak Cine Raptar 25mm f/1.9 - Yes = 72mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]

$ 25 noname 25mm f/1.2 CCTV - YES = 72mm f/3.5 equivalent [link to proof]

Zooms
 
Ernitec 6-12mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
 
Kowa TV Zoom 12.5-75mm f/1.8 - NO [link to proof]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/400458425725?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
http://www.ebay.com/itm/281090913997?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
 
Two more, Optex 1.33x, and quite cheap so far, close to end!

Today's new entries in my e-bay account are:
 
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=181122274020&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:GB:1123
 
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200915759223&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:GB:1123

great idea for a thread!
 
yes, thanks to this site 8 months ago i learned about anamorphic lenses and managed to get amazing looking stuff on a dinky lil nikon v1 camera with zero previous video experience.
 
i actually entered a local competition with said dinky camera + anamorphic for a laugh and came in second place, much to my suprise... my 30 second bit is now being aired once a week for a year on local tv.
 
i've now upgraded to a gh2 as i've actually been getting paying work, all due to the amazing people that contribute and who drop a crazy amount of knowledge on these forums, so yes, thank you guys very very much!

Having researched background information on filming with Four Thirds all over the Internet over the course of the last six months, I found the posts and comments being posted here in the EOSHD forum extremely helpful (as well as - of course - Andrew's genuine articles). They really helped me not only making a choice about the system I want to use / am using now (GH3), but for example also with a view to other equipment. And I am sure that I will find plenty of inspirational posts also in future. So I simply want to say "thank you" to you guys and girls (woman) - I feel that is more than appropriate. :-)

LOL
 

 
@Pkent: It's the older Angenieux 20-120 T3. It's a wonderful look from what I've seen so far, very 70s (this lens is from 1972). I've not had a chance to shoot much, I still need to properly rig it.
 
And rig it you must! Heavy does not even come close to describing it :o 4.5KG!
 
My word. You just never assume anything can be so dense, it feels like part of a f***ing tank! Or a piece of dark matter.
 
So yeah, not for run and gun! But can't wait to let it loose on the BMD 4K on the next big film.

Eagerly awaiting your Pocket Cinema Camera? You already have a micro for thirds camera and some C-mount lenses? Want to know if they will cover the sensor of the Pocket? Lets find out! I hope you will add your results, so we can make this list growing.
 
I will only add lenses to the lists when you have proof, in other words: images.
 
How?

Because we know the active sensor area of the BMPCC measures 12,48 x 7,02 mm, it is fairly easy to check if our C-mount lenses will cover the full sensor. Calculate this by taking a picture with a lens on your micro four thirds camera, and crop out the image area of theBMPCC.
 


In Photoshop:
Open the image. Go to Edit > Image Size, uncheck resample image. Change Image width to 19 centimeters, press ok Go to Image > Canvas Size, change dimensions to 12,48 x 7,02cm, press OK to crop the image to BMPCC size. Resize to 1920x1080 pixels Post your results! Note: If you shoot on the GH3 or other MFT camera's, the sensor size is 17 x 13mm, so change the width in step 3 to 17 cm!

To lazy to do it yourself or you can't work it out? Upload the full resolution files and I'll do it.

List terms explained:

Yes = covers the full sensor of the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera
No = doesn't cover the sensor
Needs modification = Doesn't fit on C-mount to M43-adapter without modifications
Equivalent = The focal length and depth equivalent on a fullframe camera (5D Mark III for example)

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera Compatibility list

Primes
 
Apollo 25mm f/0.85 - Yes = 72mm f/2.4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Angenieux 10mm f/1.8 Retrofocus (Fixed Focus) - Yes (dark corners) = 28,8mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof] [more info]
 
Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 10mm f/2 - Yes - Needs modification = 28,8mm f/5.8 equivalent [link to proof] [more info]
Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 35mm f/1.9 - Yes - Needs modification = 101mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Century 9mm f/1.8 - YES (poor quality) [link to proof]
 
Computar 8mm f/1.3 - NO [link to proof]
Computar 16mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
Computar TV Lens 25mm f/1.8 - YES = 72mm f/5,2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Cosmicar 8,5mm f/1.5 - NO [link to proof]
Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.8 - YES - Needs modification = 36mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
Cosmicar 25mm f/1.8 - YES - 72mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]

Ernitec 6.5mm f/1.8 - YES (heavy distortion) [link to proof]
Ernitec/Navitar 17mm f/0.95 - YES (v. blurry corners & distortion) [link to proof]
 
Fujinon TV 12.5mm f/1.4 - Yes (blurry corners) - Mod.? (unknown) = 36mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
Fujinon TV 16mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
Fujinon TV 35mm f/1.7 - YES - Needs modification = 101mm f/4.9 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Leitz Macro Cinegon 10mm f/1.8 - Yes (dark corners) = 28,8mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Kern Switar 10mm f/1.6 - Yes (slight vignette & blurry corners) [link to proof]
 
Nikon Cine Nikkor 13mm f/1.8 - Yes =  37,5mm f/5.2 [link to proof]
Nikon Cine Nikkor 25mm f/1.8 - Yes = 72mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Pentax 25mm f/1.4 - YES - 72mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Schneider 10mm f/1.8 (silver version) - No (almost) [link to proof]
Schneider-Kreuznach Cinegon 11.5mm f/1.9 - No (almost) = 33mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 16mm f/2 - Yes = 46mm f/5.8 equivalent [link to proof] [link to proof (2)]
Schneider-Kreuznach Xenon 25mm f/0.95 - Yes = 72mm f/2.7 equivalent [link to proof]
Schneider Xenoplan 17mm f/1.7 - Yes (blurry corners) - [link to proof]
 
SLR Magic 11mm F1.4 - Yes - [link to proof] (added by EOSHD)
 
Tokina TV Lens  8mm f/1.3 - NO [link to proof]
Tokina TV Lens 16mm f/1.6 - NO [link to proof]
 
Taylor-Hobson Cooke Kinic 25mm f/1.3 - Yes = 72mm f/3.7 equivalent [link to proof]
Taylor-Hobson 25mm f/1.9 - Yes - 72mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Wesley 25mm f/1.4 - YES = 72mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Wollensak Cine Raptar 12.5mm f/1.5 - Yes = 36mm f/4.3 equivalent [link to proof]
Wollensak Cine Raptar 25mm f/1.9 - Yes = 72mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]

$ 25 noname 25mm f/1.2 CCTV - YES = 72mm f/3.5 equivalent [link to proof]

Zooms
 
Ernitec 6-12mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
 
Kowa TV Zoom 12.5-75mm f/1.8 - NO [link to proof]

Eagerly awaiting your Pocket Cinema Camera? You already have a micro for thirds camera and some C-mount lenses? Want to know if they will cover the sensor of the Pocket? Lets find out! I hope you will add your results, so we can make this list growing.
 
I will only add lenses to the lists when you have proof, in other words: images.
 
How?

Because we know the active sensor area of the BMPCC measures 12,48 x 7,02 mm, it is fairly easy to check if our C-mount lenses will cover the full sensor. Calculate this by taking a picture with a lens on your micro four thirds camera, and crop out the image area of theBMPCC.
 


In Photoshop:
Open the image. Go to Edit > Image Size, uncheck resample image. Change Image width to 19 centimeters, press ok Go to Image > Canvas Size, change dimensions to 12,48 x 7,02cm, press OK to crop the image to BMPCC size. Resize to 1920x1080 pixels Post your results! Note: If you shoot on the GH3 or other MFT camera's, the sensor size is 17 x 13mm, so change the width in step 3 to 17 cm!

To lazy to do it yourself or you can't work it out? Upload the full resolution files and I'll do it.

List terms explained:

Yes = covers the full sensor of the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera
No = doesn't cover the sensor
Needs modification = Doesn't fit on C-mount to M43-adapter without modifications
Equivalent = The focal length and depth equivalent on a fullframe camera (5D Mark III for example)

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera Compatibility list

Primes
 
Apollo 25mm f/0.85 - Yes = 72mm f/2.4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Angenieux 10mm f/1.8 Retrofocus (Fixed Focus) - Yes (dark corners) = 28,8mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof] [more info]
 
Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 10mm f/2 - Yes - Needs modification = 28,8mm f/5.8 equivalent [link to proof] [more info]
Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 35mm f/1.9 - Yes - Needs modification = 101mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Century 9mm f/1.8 - YES (poor quality) [link to proof]
 
Computar 8mm f/1.3 - NO [link to proof]
Computar 16mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
Computar TV Lens 25mm f/1.8 - YES = 72mm f/5,2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Cosmicar 8,5mm f/1.5 - NO [link to proof]
Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.8 - YES - Needs modification = 36mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
Cosmicar 25mm f/1.8 - YES - 72mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]

Ernitec 6.5mm f/1.8 - YES (heavy distortion) [link to proof]
Ernitec/Navitar 17mm f/0.95 - YES (v. blurry corners & distortion) [link to proof]
 
Fujinon TV 12.5mm f/1.4 - Yes (blurry corners) - Mod.? (unknown) = 36mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
Fujinon TV 16mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
Fujinon TV 35mm f/1.7 - YES - Needs modification = 101mm f/4.9 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Leitz Macro Cinegon 10mm f/1.8 - Yes (dark corners) = 28,8mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Kern Switar 10mm f/1.6 - Yes (slight vignette & blurry corners) [link to proof]
 
Nikon Cine Nikkor 13mm f/1.8 - Yes =  37,5mm f/5.2 [link to proof]
Nikon Cine Nikkor 25mm f/1.8 - Yes = 72mm f/5.2 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Pentax 25mm f/1.4 - YES - 72mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Schneider 10mm f/1.8 (silver version) - No (almost) [link to proof]
Schneider-Kreuznach Cinegon 11.5mm f/1.9 - No (almost) = 33mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
Schneider-Kreuznach Cine-Xenon 16mm f/2 - Yes = 46mm f/5.8 equivalent [link to proof] [link to proof (2)]
Schneider-Kreuznach Xenon 25mm f/0.95 - Yes = 72mm f/2.7 equivalent [link to proof]
Schneider Xenoplan 17mm f/1.7 - Yes (blurry corners) - [link to proof]
 
SLR Magic 11mm F1.4 - Yes - [link to proof] (added by EOSHD)
 
Tokina TV Lens  8mm f/1.3 - NO [link to proof]
Tokina TV Lens 16mm f/1.6 - NO [link to proof]
 
Taylor-Hobson Cooke Kinic 25mm f/1.3 - Yes = 72mm f/3.7 equivalent [link to proof]
Taylor-Hobson 25mm f/1.9 - Yes - 72mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Wesley 25mm f/1.4 - YES = 72mm f/4 equivalent [link to proof]
 
Wollensak Cine Raptar 12.5mm f/1.5 - Yes = 36mm f/4.3 equivalent [link to proof]
Wollensak Cine Raptar 25mm f/1.9 - Yes = 72mm f/5.6 equivalent [link to proof]

$ 25 noname 25mm f/1.2 CCTV - YES = 72mm f/3.5 equivalent [link to proof]

Zooms
 
Ernitec 6-12mm f/1.4 - NO [link to proof]
 
Kowa TV Zoom 12.5-75mm f/1.8 - NO [link to proof]

Wesley 24mm f/1.4 - YES  - pics to follow
Cosmicar 25mm f/1.8 - YES - pics to follow
Pentax 25mm f/1.4 - YES - pics to follow

It'll be great to see that GH2 test you mentioned. Let us know once it's done!

And prepare to be disappointed!

And prepare to be disappointed!