Jump to content

Dave Reeve

Members
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from SigurdW in The Bolex-Anamorphot 16/32/1.5x thread   
    Yes there is a difference. I had a 16/32 and a moller 32 - one with great front optic one with great rear optic. I took it to a lens repair shop to see if the elements could be swapped to make one great lens and there were subtle differences in the optics. Also worth noting that the repair shop got hold of a couple of another 16/32s and went to undertake a swop from one of those and the element was a little different there as well. So not only are there differences between the 32 and 16/32 but not all 16/32s are alike...
  2. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from Liszon in The Bolex-Anamorphot 16/32/1.5x thread   
    Yes there is a difference. I had a 16/32 and a moller 32 - one with great front optic one with great rear optic. I took it to a lens repair shop to see if the elements could be swapped to make one great lens and there were subtle differences in the optics. Also worth noting that the repair shop got hold of a couple of another 16/32s and went to undertake a swop from one of those and the element was a little different there as well. So not only are there differences between the 32 and 16/32 but not all 16/32s are alike...
  3. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from rokkimort in The Bolex-Anamorphot 16/32/1.5x thread   
    Yes there is a difference. I had a 16/32 and a moller 32 - one with great front optic one with great rear optic. I took it to a lens repair shop to see if the elements could be swapped to make one great lens and there were subtle differences in the optics. Also worth noting that the repair shop got hold of a couple of another 16/32s and went to undertake a swop from one of those and the element was a little different there as well. So not only are there differences between the 32 and 16/32 but not all 16/32s are alike...
  4. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from richg101 in FS - Iscorama 2001   
    Hi I'm selling my Iscorama 2001. Just not using it enough and feel it deserves to be used! It's in great condition - not far off perfect. a Little chip in the front barrel just above the 'R' of 'ISCORAMA' as pictured. Focus all smooth. Based in London if you want to take a look. It's nikon mount currently with an EOS adapter. Feel free to ask any questions. Euros 2500 inc delivery.
     











  5. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from JohnBarlow in Panasonic LX100 with a Baby-H   
    Hi just a short mood piece I wanted to share shot on the Panasonic LX100 with a Baby Hypergonar attachment. I'm yet to read the camera's manual though and think I'd benefit from doing so...!
     
     
  6. Like
    Dave Reeve reacted to Sebastien Farges in ArThur H, french singer and anamorphic teaser :)   
    Hi anamorphic friends,
     
    I'm working a lot these past months so I post less than usual ;)
     
    Here is a teaser of the new album of Arthur H, a famous french singer. It was done before last summer, shot on GH3 + my baby Hypergonar 1.75x on my Qioptiq 35mm f1.6 MeVis-C C-mount lens.
    Badfully I didn't have the GH4 yet ;)
     
    My actual work is a 26mn Making Of a long feature movie, shot by me in 4K anamorphic in Ethiopia last november. Stay tune.
     
    Thanks
     

  7. Like
    Dave Reeve reacted to rook in Iscorama 2001 question   
    These stills look great, Dave.  It looks like you got it figured it out.
     
    Odd how imprecise these lenses can be. 
     
    That said, IMHO, on a 16:9 sensor the 1.41 is a more desirable. Looks like you got lucky! 
     
    Fun lens.
  8. Like
    Dave Reeve reacted to Bioskop.Inc in Iscorama 2001 question   
    Dave, i wouldn't worry about this too much, as anamorphics aren't a precise science & the stretch factor is always a ball-park-token-figure - its part of the charm/look that anamorphics give to an image.
    The stretch factor can change due to various factors - I've noticed different focal length taking lens can affect the stretch on some anamorphics & also where abouts you are on the focus scale can also play a role too (i.e. being @ infinity can give a different stretch than @ 2m).
    Pick a factor you're happy with and stick with it, as this could quite easily drive you insane - I just go with 2.66:1, as i'm not after perfection, i'm after the anamorphic look.
  9. Like
    Dave Reeve reacted to tony wilson in Some time with the SLR Magic Anamorphot 1.33x - 50   
    if rocky roads  sean cunilingus or whatever his name is is such a slick cinematographic willy his studio tour above shows he was having a bad camera day.
    bland gear
    bland tour
    more slr magic cod salesmanship
    and cock wars for anyone says a bad thing about made in china bland cheap optics.
     
    still waiting for the slr road movie rocky.
     
    NOBODY IS GONNA BE MAKING A MOVIE ON THIS CHINA ANAMORPHOT.
     
    jokers talking about iscorama and panavision c in the same breath need to have a red nose on and be in a circus rather than in pretend hollywood studio tours
    in 1 year it will be interesting to see what the resale value will be of letus and slr magic.
     
    these optics are clinical and dead owing to the use of single element china glass which is a rip off of recipes from schott zeiss germany and ohara japan.
     
    what a crock and what a cock defending a bland optic with the ugliest flare in show biz.
    and lookin for a fight any chance he can get.
    even though he has only ever had or used shit anamorphic  optics
    i am rocky and i nose more than you wanna fight  blah blah blah
  10. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from tony wilson in Some time with the SLR Magic Anamorphot 1.33x - 50   
    Oh dear... Why are you being so defensive? I have to admit that I haven't worked on any full on hollywood movies, but I started my working life as a PA on films that featured Rutger Hauer, Robin Williams, Sean Connery, Michelle Pfeiffer, RIchard Gere, amongst others (Tactical Assault (they never did come up with a decent title but it's a shit film anyway - but was fun to make!), Jakob the Liar and First Knight). For the most part I was PA to the actors and you really get to know the nuts and bolts doing that. They spent a lot of time waiting; in their trailers (sometimes waiting with the PA girls - no names mentioned!) or on the seats with their names on. A lot of the crew spend a lot of time waiting. Mainly because the film has been budgeted to achieve a certain production level and they can afford to make things look and sound beautiful. That's just how it is. Perhaps the professional productions you work on are different - perhaps TV soaps - they're more about churning material out (but have no use of anamorphic) - which is what you seem to be suggesting..? Anyway, since my early PA experience I've worked on several fiction and doc films - although most of my bread and butter is as an editor. However - I recently shot an edited a feature doc on Thai music that is currently being completed by Technicolor in Thailand (and sadly it seems it's the last film that will pass through their doors...) Anyway I'm not going to waste any more of my time on this thread when you just pathetically lay into people for using the phrase 'each to their own'. It's all horses for courses after all...
  11. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from tony wilson in Some time with the SLR Magic Anamorphot 1.33x - 50   
    I'm sorry but you're wrong. Actors are used to waiting around for ages while shots are set up with stand ins. That's one reason they have trailers and canvas chairs with their names on the back. There's an awful lot of hanging around and waiting on a film set while the various crew members light, practice camera moves and focus pulls etc because it needs to be beautiful. The truth is that most anamorphics wouldn't end up on a professional set. The SLRmagic is one of them as is the bolex.

    Now as a case of 'each to their own' we're here because we're enthusiasts. We're experimenting With these lenses for the most part as an aside to our bread and butter. That's not to say we won't use them in our work because we probably will in some way. I met someone using the bolex for a doc for example. Its just I'd personally rather spend the time to work with the sumptuous bolex than the SLRMagic which aesthetically leaves me cold. Each to their own.
  12. Like
    Dave Reeve reacted to Mihnea Popescu in Music video shot on BMCC/Speedbooser/Isco54   
    Hi guys,
     
    We just shot this video with the BMCC, Metabones Speedbooster, Nikon Lenses and Iscorama 54MC.
    RAW files were developped in After Effects CS6 (with Camera Raw) to Prores444 2400/1350. Color grading was done in AE.
     

     
    Please let us know what you think, we'd love to get some feedback.
     
    Cheers,
    Mihnea
  13. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from Tito Ferradans in Selling Isco 2000, LA7200, Bolex Moller 8/19/1.5   
    Isco 2000 has one area of separation on the rear element but is otherwise in great condition with very little dust. It's a metal bodied solid lens that can work on full frame and crop sensors. Separation is common on Isco 2000s and this shouldn't affect the image. Comes with front and back caps and original projector mount as pictured. I've taken a pic on crop sensor and could borrow a full frame if you'd like to see a sample. Or if you want any other samples let me know and I'll see what I can do. Photo was taken handheld on a 58mm helios. £450.
     
    '>
    '>
    '>
    '>
    '>
    '>
    '>
     
    LA7200 - in great condition with very little dust (easy to open up and clean what is there) and no scratches or marks on the glass. As far as I know this is the 1.33 lens that goes the widest. £550.
     
    '>
    '>
    '>
     
    Bolex Moller 8/19/1.5 - this is almost as new with very few marks on the body. Front and rear elements both totally clean - no marks or anything. I've only spotted a couple of specs of dust. And very rare for one of these lenses comes with front and rear lens caps. Pics are here:
    " title="External link">
    " title="External link">
    " title="External link">
    " title="External link">
    Photo on 550d taken with this lens: " title="External link">
    Can send you the RAW if you want. I'm looking for £900 or thereabout for this lens.
  14. Like
    Dave Reeve reacted to Matthias MalleÅ¡iÄ� in Digital Sensors = Anamorphic Redundant?   
    Have you tried uploading 2592x1080? With anamorphic adapter you don't really gain any resolution. Something similar is squezing 1920x1080 ordinary footage to 960x1080 and back, you'll see what happens in terms of resolution. Otherwise 1920x804 is just a way of presenting your footage, I prefer 800 or 816 (dividable by 16)....
  15. Like
    Dave Reeve reacted to Sebastien Farges in SAMPLES PART TWO ! Sony A7 + Bolex Anamorphic   
    I've just done a movie with the A7 and the upcoming SLR Magic anamorphot lens :
     

  16. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from Sebastien Farges in SAMPLES PART TWO ! Sony A7 + Bolex Anamorphic   
    I'm selling one of these lenses if anyone's interested - a bit flat out on an edit at the moment but I'll take some stills when I can and post them. It's a gorgeous lens, as is the 8/19/1.5. Great photos Seb - some real gems in there. And you're a top duck wrangler it seems.
  17. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from tony wilson in Chinese New Years 2014 - SLR Magic Anamorphot + Canon 5DmkIII RAW   
    There's been a lot of rubbishing of the LA7200 lately but it can still produce lovely stuff like Spencer Estabrooks posted - if used correctly you can get lovely detail in the close ups and great wide shots as well. Spencer said he shot this some time ago on an unhacked GH1 with a 24mm lens:
     

  18. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from Spencer Estabrooks in LA7200 Anamorphic Western   
    Does look great - nice one - lovely textural shots. What's Dark Energy?
  19. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from yannis.zach in FOR SALE: Moller 32/1.5x   
    It varies depending on how much needs doing - but mine cost US$225+postage and there was also a tax charge. It's definitely worth it!!!
  20. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from yannis.zach in My latest tindersticks collaboration   
    Thanks - sorry been working getting an edit done late for the last few nights and my brain is a bit mushed - by combo do you mean kit? It's very simple - a 550d with magic lantern and a range of helios lenses. Occasionally I held bits of plastic in front of the lens - can't remember if that's in this film or another one!.
  21. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from yannis.zach in My latest tindersticks collaboration   
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdXRc9syInQ
     
    Enjoy! (hopefully...)
     
    Dave
  22. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from Sean Cunningham in Anamorphic lens sizes   
    I've added a pic to the gallery comparing lens sizes. Just a bit of fun while the rendering chugs on... Enjoy!
     
    http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/756-anamorphics-comp/
     
  23. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from Chris Elkerton in Anamorphic lens sizes   
    I've added a pic to the gallery comparing lens sizes. Just a bit of fun while the rendering chugs on... Enjoy!
     
    http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/756-anamorphics-comp/
     
  24. Like
    Dave Reeve got a reaction from Tito Ferradans in Century compared to the LA7200   
    I came across this post that compares a Century Optics wide screen converter to Panasonic's LA7200: http://www.horroblepictures.com/p/cinematography.html
     
    I have to admit that I didn't realise that Century Optics was a subsidiary of Schneider Optics. I also didn't realise there were two Century Optics adapters -the standard DS-1609-SB which is the most common on ebay, and the DS-WS13-SB which is focusable and can be zoomed through. More info here: http://www.schneideroptics.com/pdfs/century/brochures/CP_PD170_VX2100.pdf
     
     
×
×
  • Create New...