Jump to content

Tito Ferradans

Members
  • Content Count

    729
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Tito Ferradans last won the day on February 14 2016

Tito Ferradans had the most liked content!

About Tito Ferradans

  • Rank
    Anamorphic Enthusiast
  • Birthday 04/19/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Vancouver - Canada
  • Interests
    Anamorphic, of course!

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    www.tferradans.com/anamorphic

Recent Profile Visitors

4,524 profile views
  1. Building a setup is a series of very personal choices. All we can do is provide you with useful info, and here's some! Go to youtube.com/tferradans and watch as many of them as you can. Then go to tferradans.com/anamorphic and read the guide. Finally, check your lens choices based on the calculator at anamorphic calculator.
  2. Yes. The thinner the better, until it becomes too thin and the flare disappears. hahahah
  3. I can cross being called "mighty" off my bucket list! Thanks @heart0less! The guide will be awesome, I'm just adding in the final images this week. As for the issue at hand, the fishing line indeed makes a cut through bokeh, but for a goPro it shouldn't be noticeable. The downside is that the gopro's lens is crazy wide and the fishing line technique doesn't usually play nice with wide angles. I can't think of much to do to make it flare more except working in post-production...
  4. Oh, very much. I've given up on gimbals altogether a few shoots ago. They always fail. And look mechanic. As for the weight, I'm pretty flimsy, so when I have my Iscorama rig up, (rails, follow focus, v-lock, evf, I'll already feel it at the end of the day. And I only shoot handheld.
  5. This image is the perfect example of why I don't like projection scopes. As for crop and FOV, you can always use the calculator. 😛 www.tferradans.com/anacalc/go
  6. Hey @Rikoshet The reason I don't love big anamorphics is because although they cost you less at first, in the long run you'll be wrecked by hauling them around. Plus support gear and stress on your taking lens and camera mount. They usually have far minimum focus (past 4m), and not necessarily go wider than their smaller counterparts. Flares are a different universe and I lack info on that from lack of experimentation. Good luck!
  7. why'd you copy my pinned thread?
  8. I don't like being unfriendly, but the anamorphic store is the pinnacle of everything that is wrong in the scope and diy world. I'd stay away from this dude for as long as possible. As for larger scopes, I've seen lots of good stuff coming from them, the issue is what kind of rig do you work with to support it.
  9. Heya! No, that won't work because optics don't work that way.
  10. nope. that's not how the optics work.
  11. The ratio is skewed. Hollywood held the vast majority of the anamorphic shooting. but the projectors needed the lenses for proper screening of the films. Since Hollywood exports American culture to the whole world, endless theaters had to have their projectors capable of anamorphic screening. This is a poorly written sentence. I just woke up. But you get the idea, right?
  12. Yeah, the flares are hardcore, but you can tone them down in post in a few seconds. As for price, the Compact goes for $500, while it's hard to find a good anamorphic under $350. In the end, it's personal taste/budget. I don't have any SLR Magic lenses at the moment, nor any 2x scopes, I only held onto an Iscorama pre36, because I don't want to deal with double focus/single focus attachments. 😛
  13. Yeah, the Sankor 16-D or Elmo I will vignette like crazy on a Helios 44 speedboosted to full frame. Go for an 85mm focal length if you want full sensor coverage, or pull up 4:3 crop marks and live with dark edges in the shot. Best bang for the buck though, in my opinion, is the SLR Magic Anamorphot 40-Compact. Cheap, available, flares, gives you a taste of what the real deal is, and will work fine with your Helios on full frame.
×
×
  • Create New...