Lucian

Yowza!  I think my stomach did a backflip just reading about that.  I don't know how many times I've fantasized the MFT adapter un-coupling and sending my whole lens assembly tumbling to the floor, or dropping an achromat.  

I cable tie it round the rods just to make sure there is no vertical lift by accident too

Yes for sure, I always use 15mm rig with the iscorama. Lol might need a second lens support with this thing.

yes its that easy , Ive posted about how to do this before in the Anamorphic section
 
the Century is a very high quality piece of glass made by Schneider , its big and heavy but does the job very well
the bayonet at the back comes off with a few grub screws, I then added a 77mm thead , so I can use a 77-72 step down ring as needs be as this is a very good x0.7 wide adaptor for any lens not just anamorphics , so I use it on any lens with 77, 72 and 67mm fronts

Yes, but what that ultimately means is different based on the vertical height of your sensor.  Your vertical FOV determines your framing and distance to subject which directly feeds into your DOF at a given stop.   That may or may not be important to you depending on if you're using theatrical anamorphic films as your reference.  

There's definitely wider lenses to build out a Jena set.  Here's one of the best threads I've found on the subject, if you're not already familiar with it:
 
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?91477-Which-Zeiss-Jena-set-to-build
 
...down at #9 lists what appears to be a full set.  The f/2.4 Flekogon looks pretty decent in what little poking around I've done.  At APS-C f/2.4 is decent.  Assuming Metabones produces a Speedbooster for the D16 as good or better than the one for the BMPCC, you'd be looking at an equivalent f/3.5 or so compared to anamorphic 35mm, but that's using the BMPCC numbers.  The D16 could be better in this application because supposedly they'll open up the height on the sensor, one of these days, when they stop messing about with silly f/4 c-mounts and leather bags.  
 
Regardless of scaling up to APS-C a 16:9 sensor is still at a disadvantage because vertically it's still highly cropped compared to anamorphic 35mm on film.  Supposedly the D16 will eventually be 4:3 for anamorphic purposes and that will be pretty major.  Still, keep in mind the stops used on real films, even those considered "wide open" are rarely terribly big.  Django Unchained was shot mostly at 40mm - 50mm and around T3.1 while Boogie Nights was also mostly 40mm and 50mm, T2.8 for night (on really slow stock) and T4 for most everything else.  
 
One of the most wide open anamorphic films in recent memory, some might say irresponsibly so, is Killing Them Softly and they did shoot mostly in the lower T2 ranges but that's a very rare choice.  It's spherical films that need to be more open, because the act of cropping throws every focal more telephoto compared to anamorphic, forcing the camera to back off, pushing the subject in the direction of the hyperfocal, reducing bokeh.  That's part of what's to blame for Super35's reputation for sharpness and greater ease of focus.
 
On your GH2 + Iscorama project it makes total sense, the problems you encountered, because that 35mm was the equivalent of shooting with a 55mm lens in anamorphic 35mm, a fairly "normal" focal length, not terribly wide.  That Helios was the equivalent to shooting a 94mm lens in the anamorphic 35mm film format (anamorphic frame height = 17.5mm and the GH2 sensor height = 10.7mm so that's a 1.64 factor).

the Zeiss P6 medium format lenses are some of the best you can get , I like these lenses alot , great contrast , Zeiss warm colours and very sharp !!
and they have character , all hand made - no computers used in making these or designing them
ticks all the boxes for me!!

If you're boosted up to being effectively APS-C then you're in the range of the 35mm portions of The Master.  As these were chosen specifically for their ability to cut well with the 65mm portions of the film that's "interesting" enough for my money.  That's plenty "magic".
 
That film is tangible enough proof that not all is lost when going smaller than full frame.  PT Anderson and his DP tested literally dozens upon dozens of lenses, access to anything and everything, and this was the selection made for cutting between formats without jarring moments.  There was no portion of the film that didn't look amazing and without having previously read specific references to what scene might have been shot with what format nobody here can either say what is what or that the proof isn't in the pudding.

wide open, an 80mm f2.8 medium format lens will transmit more light onto a full frame sensor than a full frame lens of the same aperture/focal length.  almost all full frame lenses show vignette wide open on full frame, but the vignette on the medium format image circle is cropped away when used on full frame so the illumination is more uniform.
 
in the centre of the frame you will see exactly the same exposure, but the edges will be different by a stop or more.
 
Edge image quality will also be worlds apart - the medium format lenses delivering better quality due to being used within their sweet spot.
 
I use Hasselblad and Schneider medium format lenses on the sony A7R because I often like to position the subject at the edge of the frame, while keeping the lens wide open.  Only with the medium format lenses do you get really good results at 36mpx at the edges when the lens is wide open.
 
regarding iscorama use on medium format, you'll only see light loss and related issues from step rings if you use them on medium format sensors.  the crop factor negates any adverse effects.
 
finally, As i have said a few times, medium format lenses only tend to deliver 'creative' looking images when on big sensors/film surfaces.  when on smaller sensors you loose the aesthetic benefits such as that awesome wide fov and shallow dof obtained by a longer lens delivering wider fov due to the bigger imaging area (80mm on medium format = 50mm on full frame).   
 
The main argument against using medium format lenses is that some will say they are not as capable at delivering a fine enough resolution in 'line pairs/mm'. - due to not being designed to compress all the information into such a small area.  I know for a fact that my schneiders out perform my hasselblads drastically in terms of resolution when used on full frame, 36mpx.  Once on medium format imaging areas this difference is less noticable.
 
 
It is worth reading up on lens talk in the view camera / bellows type technical camera user forums since this subject is easier to discuss in the domain of 8x10" frames!   Schneider make a range of 'digitar' view camera lenses which aim to address this issue by delivering way more line pairs per millimeter than typicakl view camera lenses - which would suggest there milage in this discussion.

Thanks Julian, for just hanging out enjoying the lovely weather we had here for a short period they came out pretty good.
 
That combo sounds crazy, Might be better with the stopped down oval aperture. The second shot is like an F4 aperture disc. I have tried the 2X oval aperture and the isco and wide open its just a bit too much. 
 
Its so cool we can have these creative freedoms to play around.

lovely man.  You need to make another nice family vid with this setup:)
 
 
@Lucian..  The TRUMP58 has enough room to fit a iscorama 36 or iscorama into the front cavity - this was part of the design criteria.   Rob has a extension tube to allow the rama to be mounted into the trump in the same way it would mount to a ff58 iscorama optimised.
 
biggest aperture on trump or ff58 on oval 1.5x is f2.8
biggest aperture on trump of ff58 on oval 2x is f3.5
 
However, since the ovals are still as tall as an f2 round aperture the depth of field is almost as shallow, even though the aperture is a smaller area.  Vertical dof is shallower than horizontal dof in simpler terms.
 
 
The rama inside a trump makes it a little awkward to align the iscorama, and it looks strange too - since the two buttons are harder to access, but its not a real problem.  I do intend on machining a iscorama rehousing specifically for the trump58 - giving focus gears but havn't had time.  

I have a bunch od these lenses they are Pentacon 6 mount (P6)
 
so to use a speedbooster you will need an adaptor from P6 to what ever mount your speedbooster is
 
Yes I have used my Schneider anamorphics on the Carl Zeiss 80mm f2.8 Biometar it has a 67mm front so works will with the Schneider that has a 70.6mm rear

Sadly the comparison images seem to be gone. Anyway, it is simply impossible. That DP can't beat physics either. Yes, they gather more light, but they distribute it to a bigger image circle because they have to cover medium format film. So you will loose that light. If there would be some kind of speed booster for medium format, you could bundle that light onto a full frame sensor and actually win an F-stop.
 
On the other hand, a 50mm 1.4 on a full frame camera has a lot of light fall of in the covers (vignetting). A medium format lens on a fullframe sensor wont have much light fall off wide open because you are only using the middle of the image circle (which is the brightest). So maybe that's the difference he's seeing. Claiming f/4 is like f/2, that is a two stop difference. A f/1.4 lens might have close to 2 stops light fall of in the corners, so there you'll probably see a difference, but that's gonna be it.

indeed.  speed is slightly different (particularly if uniform sensor coverage is important.  Wide open  an f2.8 medium format 80mm lens will usually be twice as bright in the corners as an 80mm f2.8 135 format lens.  the 135 80mm will show around 1 stop of vignette on the edges.  the medium format lens will be a lot less - probably not measurable.
 
I imagine the helios 40 will have almost 2 stops of darkening at the edge of a full frame sensor, though I have not used one, its highly likely.  this in combinaton with its over stretched optics are the reason it looks so beautiful.

Recently I got a cat, so now I can make proper test videos :P
 

 
Panasonic GH4 firmware 1.0
Lens: Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 + >Petit Cinevision 1.5x anamorphot
 
4K @ 24 fps (3840x2160)
Cinelike V profile, ungraded
 
All shots at f/2.8, 1/50.
ISO around 4000.
 
Soundtrack: "Menehune Dance" by James Pants (jamespants.com)
 

 

hey there!
how does the reds tan .25 compare to the tokina .4, both in terms of added sharpness and CA reduction; and focus range?
 
I have the Tokina and it's great, but would love some more control of focus range.
 
Thanks!

As I said the Super-Tak 55mm f1.8 & 35mm f3.5 are v.good for sharpness.
 
The Russain lenses can be a bit of a crap shoot quality-wise & the Mir 1b does seem to be the weakest link (still nice though), but have you tried the Mir 24 35mm f2 (it comes in Nikon or M42 & is MC) its much better.
The other Russains that i like are the Tair 11a, Jupiter 9 ( a 85mm f2 - dreamy wide open like the Helios 40-2) & the classic Helios 44-2.
 
The Yashica ML lenses are good on a budget or if you've got the money Zeiss Contax (obviously).
 
I've recently switched cameras to the BM Pocket & have been using a Nikon 24mm f2.8 ai-s which is proving to be excellent (will post a grading test soon), so am really tempted to go the whole hog & get a set. However, I love my Russain lenses & would rather wait a little to see if the Canon EF Speedbooster gets released.
 
On a slightly different note, I got the chance to see the original box for the 54 & it did state that it was optimised to be used with Zoom lenses as well as Primes. So I've been really tempted to try this out with either the Angenieux 35-70mm + speedbooster or the Meteor 5-1 16-69mm f1.9 (a 16mm film lens) - probably the later as its way cheaper & Russain.
 
The Helios 40-2 is a lovely lens & the swirly bokeh wide-open is to die for & a test chart isn't the same as actually filming with it - love it, just can't use it with the Pocket cam.
I've got one of his Angenieux single +0.25, but your doublet really sharpens things up nicely - i was really tempted to get one.
 
Anyways, nice test & thanks for the ProRes version!

Will do, hopefully it's usable. The cmount 25mm 0.85 is a really great lens, reasonable wide open, sharp at 1.4 and makes a great pair to the iscorama with only a couple of shortcomings: 1) physically too small so the rear of iscorama sometimes spins when focusing. 2) a little to long focal length for 16mm sensor, around 20mm would be the sweet spot. If this one is similar in quality it would be perfect :) 

I'd be happy to put my name in the hat, as an ex-Uni Lecturer/BBC man - to keep things on topic, stick up for the small guys & the educational side of things & perhaps getting people to write stickies that would be useful/interesting to the forum community.

there is a third party one on ebay right now ! not Metabones but does the same job for $100
 
we have all been debating this here for some time here
- its the same glass in the FD version that is in their EF version
 
 
'?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>

g6 is way superior to gh2 in low light
gone is all the fizz noise in the blacks
Ive swopped from gh2 to using g6 now and the whole camera is much better then the gh2
the screens are superb the evf is amazing cant work without it now
 
the iso's are all alot cleaner now alot less noise
 
focus peaking is great I leave it on all the time now
and the remote wifi control of the camera on your iphone is unreal
I can pull focus and stop start recording change the iso etc etc all via wifi
with the camera 100 feet away on a jib arm !
 
the panasonic image ap is free and very very useful!!
 
g6 is the way to go

And they might have over-paid for either the +.5 or one of several other 72mm AT-X close-up filters that are not the one folks really want.  You don't seem to be getting that.

Panasonic cameras use a pixel averaging system to dump data for video where Canon use line skipping to achieve the same thing.
Panasoinic Cameras are very very good at pixel averaging that is why the images from their cameras are so good and have so little moire compared to other cameras - so Im not really that concerned that the GH4 is a 16mp sensor.
, and mega hi iso does not really appeal to me , I rarely ever shoot over 400 iso

Hey, I would love it if you would get the chance to check out a new video that I made. It compiles footage taken of journeys through 8 different countries. It's called "Anywhere, but here" and was shot mostly with a D5200 and GH1 and includes some RX100.
 

I need something like this to lock the rear of the isco so it doesn't wobble during follow focus. Mine is un-modded though, and 170 euros is too much!
 
I've searched but can't find anything. Any thoughts?