Richard Floyd-Walker

Read: you have to focus by turning some little thumb screws which will make using this a pain in the ass. 
 
Read: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/1352-schneider-kreuznach-anamorphic-projector-lens/
BTW, Andy Lee is the seller of the lens you are linking.

I'm having a difficult time thinking of any Kubrick films that were shot anamorphic.  He's more known for 65mm and deep-focus, spherical 35mm.  In fact, many of his films are in the more squarish 1.66:1 "widescreen" standard that was favored in the UK.  A quick google shows that he may have only ever done one film using an anamorphic process, Sparticus.
 
Anyway, @wondo is reacting to the reality that stopped down there is very little that distinguishes anamorphic photography from cropped spherical photography of the same field of view if you don't have a lot of z-space parallax.  You won't get to see any distorted bokeh unless you stack the ND to get to a larger aperture (ala Killing Them Softly).  
 
However, he's being short sighted in the fact that opened up, night photography is patently useless for determining whether the adapter is no different than currently available options when it comes to sharpness (particularly at the edges) and chromatic aberration.  Dull charts would say definitively how good the lens is but charts don't tell the whole story and so I appreciate Andrew shooting in a way that would have highlighted these defects while giving a sense of the lens's overall character in situations where the shooter isn't purposely under-exposing.  His footage is rich in surface detail and texture, from edge to edge.
 
Really oval bokeh with a 1.33x adapter will be mostly reserved for close-ups because you need a CU diopter to get them.  The Tokina doublet sharpens up close and midrange shooting but it's not really good for wides, does virtually nothing for bokeh and stronger diopters aren't useable at all for wides.  So, for instance, you're not likely ever going to be able to achieve something like a Tony Scott wide, shot with a 200mm a block away, with really stretched, oval bokeh for deep foreground and deep background.  Lots of folks here shoot almost everything anamorphic with telephoto taking lenses either out of naivete or because they have no other option but it's not a realistic representation of how real motion pictures are made.
 
You can't have everything.  Slap on a Kowa or Sankor or Moeller and you can get that but you'll have to lock your camera down and can't do it while dollying forward towards your subject like Tony Scott might have, or track with them as they walk towards camera.  You can't have everything.

The C100 and FS100 are both super 35 cameras.
Which means that the only camera out of the 2 that can deliver a full frame look (if that's a priority, or you have a lot of EF glass as opposed to EF-S glass) is, ironically, the Sony. As metabones don't make an EF to EF-S speed booster.

So your 24mm 1.4 will look like 24mm on the FS100 with the adapter. Get a Smart Adapter as well as a Speedbooster and that same lens can double as a, roughly, 35mm as well. Same goes for all the other lenses you have. Provided they are EF mounts. And you get 60p as well.

On the Canon the Super 35 crop is all you've got. And you can only get 60p with the 60i Premiere CC work around.
But the C100 is just so easy to pick up and shoot with. I've only used one twice, but each time it's a pleasure. The ergonomics and metering are spot on in my opinion. As for the FS100, I've only used it once and that was all tripod so I can't comment on what it is like hand held. But handling it at the end of the day it seemed ok but no where near that solid and compact feeling that you get with the Canon. Again just my opinion. The images that both these cameras can produce is great.

Personally I haven't been able to justify owning anything other than my GH3, my SLR Magic 12 and 25 and my Voightlander 17.5. I feel that I have a hell of a lot to learn before I can truthfully say that I've out grown those.

Here are the cropped images for the Computar 12.5 f1.3
 
Focused to infinity at f16:
  Focused to infinity at f1.3:   Wide open DOP:  

Sorry for the delay in replying.
Yes it is the same lens. It feels nice an solidly built. A handsome little little fellow dare I say.
However I think that most C-Mount to NEX adapters can accept lens diameters up to 44mm.
Some stepped C-Mount to MFT adapters can can except diameters that exceed 37mm but at that point the lens is held further away from the sensor and (in some lenses at least) the focus to infinity problem occurs. It's a shame because I was hoping that I could also use this lens with my V1 but that has a similar restriction due to to mount diameter. My initial thoughts are to fabricate a new back plate for the lens from an adapter plate. That would actually increase the available diameter as the support around the recess would then not be needed. All this is theory right now but I will keep you posted. It will be a while though as I'm very busy right now.

Sorry for the delay in replying.
Yes it is the same lens. It feels nice an solidly built. A handsome little little fellow dare I say.
However I think that most C-Mount to NEX adapters can accept lens diameters up to 44mm.
Some stepped C-Mount to MFT adapters can can except diameters that exceed 37mm but at that point the lens is held further away from the sensor and (in some lenses at least) the focus to infinity problem occurs. It's a shame because I was hoping that I could also use this lens with my V1 but that has a similar restriction due to to mount diameter. My initial thoughts are to fabricate a new back plate for the lens from an adapter plate. That would actually increase the available diameter as the support around the recess would then not be needed. All this is theory right now but I will keep you posted. It will be a while though as I'm very busy right now.

I've just ordered this lens:
 
http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/l3943.html
 
I'm hoping that a 1 inch format lens should be fine for BMPC. I figured that at around £35.00 it's worth a punt for a 35mm equivalent.