Tito Ferradans

I wouldn't recommend buying a thing from that guy under any circumstances.  His products are overpriced and in some cases appear to be of poor quality.
I'd recommend taking a look at Rapido Technology's clamp selection instead. I have one of his clamps. He doesn't mess around - the quality of workmanship is great and the prices are reasonable.

In the end, we never stop talking about these suckers across multiple threads, so I'm gonna try to compile as much information as I can into this one.
 
As in most cases, diopters are cheaper than anamorphics, I ended up with a lot of them, from multiple brands and multiple performances. The key was never go where everyone else is trying to find. Got the classics too, but that was luck.
 
Anyway, let's go to the undeniable favorite: Tokina +0.4 Achromatic diopter. My only complain about it is: why aren't you bigger?! My first lens was the LA7200 and I took quite a while to find the 105mm.
 
The next lenses all had different thread sizes. I could filter the Hypergonar on 77mm or 86mm, the Kowa with 72mm, Sankor 72mm too, Isco 54 at 95mm or 86mm and had a plan of an alternative 86mm front for the Lomo Squarefront, which didn't go through. Anyway, if I started to look for all these sizes of diopters, I'd go broke.
 
My salvation were the Series 9 filters. If someone isn't familiar with these, they come as unthreaded glass, that you put into an adapter that can range between 67mm and 86mm. That pretty much covers all lenses. I got adapters for 72, 77 and 86. The glass itself has around 83mm diameter.
 
Tiffen Series 9 filters are not in production anymore, so you can pick them off cheap ($1-10), even though they're not so common. The adapters are a bit harder to find.
 
After that, I went crazy on other brands as they showed up with decent sizes. Got 77mm Spiratones +0.5 and +0.25 for $6, 86mm +0.6 Fujinon, 72mm +1.25 Fujinon, 95mm +0.25 Pentax (for the 135-600mm Pentax Zoom), 82mm +0.75 Canon (1300H), etc, all very cheap. Some of them are real heavy, and I don't know if they're achromatics or single elements.
 
The advantage of the bigger ones is, less vignetting, even when you go wide, and, the sharpness is increased, since you don't get corner areas.
 
Finally, I found a couple 4.5" ones (around 114mm), that require special adapters, like Series 9. These adapters are impossible to find! I'm making a couple myself, as I trust threads more than tape. :P
 
EDIT Dec 07, 2014
 
Why Look for Low Powered Diopters
 
There's a common question going around, of WHY fraction diopters are better than full numbers, so I'm addressing that here too. Rich has a good explanation too >here.
 
As you can see below in the math section, the numbers correspond to certain maximum and minimum focus distances. When it comes to anamorphic lenses, what is the most common minimum focus distance? Something between 1.5m and 2m (or 5 to 7 feet, imperial scale).
 
Iscoramas have 2m minimum focus. Kowas, Sankors and most dual focus projector lenses are set to 1.5m minimum focus. For most shots, this distance is greater than the distance you want to put between the camera and your subject, which leads to being unable to focus properly - also, it's a pretty messed up distance for working indoors.
 
What a +0.4 or +0.5 diopter does is turn this "near 2m minimum focus distance" into "near 2m MAXIMUM focus distance" (see math below, seriously), allowing you to frame and shoot freely indoors and much closer to your subjects. If you want extreme close ups, then you need to have stronger diopters, but a +0.5 is a key tool for "standard" shots.
 
Achromats are also better, but they have their own explanation below too.
 
Focus and Anamorphic Compression
 
Another thing that relates directly to diopters is the lens compression. Most of our 1.5x or 2x stretch lenses only have that proportion when focused to infinity. Things change when you twist the focus ring. As you get closer to minimum focus, the less compression you have. 2x lenses tend to go towards 1.7x or 1.8x, Iscoramas get very close to 1.3x. 
 
When unsqueezing your footage, this compression disparity can make shots look different from the rest of the footage, as if it was shot with a different lens. In a technical level, it really was a different optical path.
 
Using diopters you get rid of using the shorter distances on your focus ring and keep your compression constant throughout the shots.
 
DISCLAIMER: I don't know how this relates to baby anamorphics, and this CERTAINLY does not affect focus through lenses since you don't change the distance between the anamorphic elements.
 
//EDIT.
 
Strength measuring:
 
Fujinon: The first number is their maximum focus distance, the second number is the thread size. For example, a 16086 reaches 160cm at infinity (+0.6) and has 86mm thread. 190101, 190cm at infinity focus, 101mm thread.
 
Canon: The newest series (250D and 500D) measures in millimeters their maximum distance. 250mm equals +4 and 500mm equals +2. The "D" stands for Double element. The older ones use the same measuring, 1300H = 1300mm, +0.75. There's also a 900H, 105mm, which is a like +1.1.
 
When nothing is marked on it, good luck with testing the thing. It's usually not hard, but most of them have information lying around the web.
 
Thread size:
 
As well as regular threads, some are marked with a C after the number (mostly 86C, 95C and 105C), that means the thread on this filter is coarse, 1mm pitch. Our regular (fine) threads have .75mm pitch. There are adapters for these too, like the one below, from 86mm fine to 86C.
 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/350325079425
 
Minimum and Maximum focus distance:
 
Just realized that I haven't explained the math relating diopter strength and maximum focus range! Since most anamorphics perform better when focused closer to infinity, a diopter gives great help in "faking" it optically. A close up filter "sets" infinity just a couple meters/feet away, so anything BEYOND that certain point will be IMPOSSIBLE to focus.
 
Of course, this will NOT follow the lens' focus marks. Infinity on the lens now equals the diopter maximum focus distance.
 
Now, the numbers:
 
S = diopter strength (+0.5, +0.6, +1, +2, etc)
MaxFm = maximum focus distânce, measured here in METERS
 
MaxFm = 1 / (S)
 
Ha! I bet you expected something waaaay more complex, right? Some examples are never bad, so let's get to it. I'll use +0.5, +1.25 and +2 as sample strengths.
 
MaxFm = 1/(0.5) = 1/(1/2) = 1 x 2/1 = 2 meters
MaxFm = 1/(1.25) = 1/(5/4) = 1 x 4/5 = 0.8 meters
MaxFm = 1/(2) = 1/2 = 0.5 meters
 
If you live in a country where imperial scale prevails over the metric system, you just gotta do a quick fix to the expression.
 
S = diopter strength (+0.5, +0.6, +1, +2, etc)
MaxFf = maximum focus distânce, measured here in FEET
 
MaxFf = (3.3 / S)
 
Same examples from above, now in feet
 
MaxFf = 3.3/(0.5) = 1/(1/2) = 3.3 x 2/1 = 6.6 feet
MaxFf = 3.3/(1.25) = 1/(5/4) = 3.3 x 4/5 = 2.6 feet
MaxFf = 3.3/(2) = 3.3/2 = 1.6 feet
 
Regarding minimum focus distance, I'd say anything closer than half maximum focus distance is gonna look pretty bad already. With high power close ups (+2 and up), I'd say anything closer than 3/4 of your maximum focus distance is gonna be pretty bad already.
 
Of course, this "minimum focus distance" image quality has A LOT of influence from the anamorphic. Also, achromatic diopters will improve almost everything you could imagine.
 
Since I've just mentioned them, here's a list of achromatic diopters, with their strength, manufacturer, price range, etc.
http://fuzzcraft.com/achromats.html
 
Price range:
 
Just for checking, here is a list of the most common lenses and their outgoing price.
 
Tokina +0.5 72mm - $150
Kenko +0.5 72mm - $90
Tokina +0.4 72mm Achromatic - $350
Kenko +0.3 105mm - $350
Canon +2 72mm Achromatic - $100
Sigma +1.6 62mm Achromatic - $20
Angenieux +0.25 82mm - $330
Kinoptik +1 82mm Achromatic - $530
Foton-A +1 or +1.25 - $900 (GONE!)
Tiffen +0.5 to +2 138mm - $50 and up
Tiffen +0.5 to +5 Series 9 - $1-50
Tiffen/Kodak Series 9 Adapters - $20-40
Tiffen +0.5 to +2 4.5" - $10-50 (RARE)

After 6 goddamn years? 

Hey @ken! I'm pretty sure these (as most 1.33x fixed focus lenses) are two cylinders. They might be tiny and close together.
I had it for a brief while and the footage was indeed squeezed and there were flares. Saying there was oval bokeh was too much, because I don't even think GoPros can have bokeh. ?

separate it into its various bits (not pull it apart ). i mean disconnect the supperscope then the rangefinder. just have the red anamorphic  mounted to the taking lens, take some photos add on the rangfinder take some photos and the add the superscope by process of elimination you should be able to narrow the culprit down. Maybe try other taking lenses if you can. does your monitor allow you to de squeeze the image ? how does the image look de squeezed in post ?
  

I think it'd be best, if you either put some photo samples for us to confirm, whether it's scope's fault OR just contact the seller.
To my knowledge, no-one has ever had to tune their Ultra Star or posted any information about approaching this dilemma.
 
BTW: In my opinion (any many people share this belief), anamorphicstore is a huge rip-off, but it's a free country and everyone chooses what they like.

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.

That was me.

That was me.

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...

 

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...

 

The mighty Tito wrote in one of his comments that he is preparing an 'Anamorfake Guide'.
So, I highly recommend just waiting a little, since there is no better person that could answer your questions.
 
But, if you only want to 'enhance' your flares, then putting an UV filter (or two) between your taking lens and anamorphic adapter really works wonders.
Fishing line is also a good idea, but its distinct shape is often visible in bokeh. Not a deal breaker, but for purists - meh.
Don't know anything about being able to influence flare color by painting over it.
 
 

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

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.

why'd you copy my pinned thread?

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

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!

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!

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.

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.

Heya! No, that won't work because optics don't work that way.

Hey guys, I wanted to share this rehousing mod I made recently for my Iscorama 36.

It's a replacement for a front piece of old plastic housing, that is made of anodized aluminum and has cine gears, retaining 72mm front filter threads and adding just 50 grams of weight.
It took me quite some time to figure out this design and I'm pretty proud of it! It solves some real-world problems like close-focus, enabling you to focus down to 1.1m, but unlike DIY mode it has a hard stop at 1.1m and infinity, and looks way nicer then a grub screw drilled into a hole. 

I made a little video explaining what it is, since after I posted this on facebook people started asking what it does and what are the specs, and asking how to buy one. https://www.dropbox.com/s/wd1w620ddxnv2je/proxiscope.pdf?dl=0

I have decided to order a small batch of these, and already placed an order at one of the shops that does the first stage of the milling. I will make another video showing a closeup process of swapping the housings, so people can evaluate the effort and see if the price (which will be announced at the same time) is right for them. This is intended as a do-it-at-home kind of mod, but you can also take it to the nearest photo technician and they'd be able to do it for you, it's a simple process that takes 3-5 minutes to perform.
I also made a PDF with some specs, you can find it here. https://www.dropbox.com/s/wd1w620ddxnv2je/proxiscope.pdf?dl=0

If you're interested in getting one – shoot me a message and we'll figure it out, there's a little queue forming already

ok the lens arrived early, looks immaculate  very smooth action, i am very happy. just have to sort a clamp out now. it came with a case that looks brand new apart from the the holder there's barely a mark on it

what tweak said. More like a Sankor 16-D, since the Kowa 16-D is tiny.