bootsie

What a great job! Thanks!

Time to address the second most common question asked when it comes to anamorphics: "How wide can I go with this anamorphic?".
Your problems are over! Here I introduce my hFOV calculator!
Test it, break it, enjoy. Let me know.
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=8615
You can input all your settings (camera/crop factor, taking lens, focal reducers, anamorphic stretch and sensor aspect ratio) to check if you'll get vignetting, the equivalent focal length of your horizontal field of view and your final aspect ratio. You can also discover which taking lenses will give you a specific horizontal field of view and what crop should you set on your camera to achieve a specific final aspect ratio.

DSO Trump88 with 2x oval.

yes with everything set to infinity, the Rectilux will focus closer. but both can focus very close if you adjust the scope and taking lens to something other than infinity.

This is at a T/2.8 on a GH4 using a Kowa Bell & Howell with the Rectilux, followed by the SLR Magic Rangefinder. For each, I am seated as close as focus would allow. Forgive the sloppy alignment issues, I rushed this. Must get back to writing so i actually have a movie to use this stuff for...


also, if you're wondering which one looks more like the Kowa on it's own, it's the Rectilux. The Rangefinder adds warmth, blue flares/haze. Preference for either is left up to individual taste, I suppose.

The Rectilux is nearly half the weight of the Focus Module. The Focus Module alone weighs 850 grams, Rectilux alone weighs just under 470 grams.
I don't own a Focus Module, but i can say that breathing aside, The Rectilux is a neutral addition to my scope and taking lens. By that I mean, the taking lens is not restricted any more than it would be on its own in terms of shooting wide open. Chromatic aberration or blooming is not further exacerbated by the Rectilux. It is definitely more costly, but in my opinion, it's money worth spending for a piece of gear that doesn't degrade the optical chain in any way. And the breathing is nearly identical to what you see with this old Russian Lomo anamorphics. And you can keyframe it out via horizontal scaling in post if you need to.

This thread went from 'weird' to 'absolute awesomeness' in two posts.
Art V., you're my new idol. Anamorphic macro is definitely something I'm hearing (AND SEEING!!!!) for the first time. The quality of the work as well as your patience to go into the details of the explanations already won my respect. Great stuff, man!

Hi Bootsie...
Thanks! Here are some quick photos of two of my shooting rigs, with an explanation for each pic.
The image above shows my set-up for shooting with a high magnification supplemental lens reverse mounted on the iscorama, using the Isco on my Nikkor-H 85mm f/1.8. The bracket is made from two strips of hardware store aluminum, drilled to allow mounting with a knob onto the tripod mount of the camera. The angle of the arms is adjustable to allow for different sized foil reflectors to be used at various close working distances. This is a special short-arm bracket for working very close to a subject when there's not much room to move around. The Iscorama has the back end (50mm Nikon mount section removed.  Attached at that point is a 52mm to 49mm step-down ring. Onto that are mounted three empty 52mm filter rings to allow the Isco to be mounted on any of my primary lenses having a 52mm filter thread. This ensures that the protruding back element of the Isco compression module doesn't come into contact with the primary lens glass. This three ring "spacer" then serves as a convenient place to attacht an old tripod mount (upside-down) from a junk telephoto lens, which is used as an anchor point for a bowl flash diffuser made from the dish found in a particular brand of frozen dinner. The plastic diffuser has a moveable black piece that allows for soft directional lighting. This diffuser mounts atop the lens using the silver knob on the repurposed tripod mount. The ring resting between the two lenses is a 72 to 52mm step-down ring. All my supplemental lenses have been set up with 52mm rings to mount on the Isco, which is fitted with the 72-52mm ring. This simplifies mounting any of my add-on lenses onto the Isco. Plus, the Iscorama's filter ring is plastic, and subject to wear and possible cross-threading when I'm working rushed. The metal step-down ring saves the Isco's threads, and results in faster lens swapping. The larger lens on the left is the front cell from a junk Vivitar 28-210mm zoom lens... set up for reverse mounting with a macro-reverse adapter ring, and is incredibly sharp, but has a curved field. With the Isco mounted on the 85mm, it gives a "field width" of about 29mm at a lens-to-subject of 6.5 cm. The smaller lens on the right is the large "common objective" from an American Optical "Cycloptic" stereo microscope, mounted in a cell I've constructed from six empty 52mm filter rings. This mounts on the Isco with the front of the objective toward the subject... the same way it's mounted on the microscope. It's apochromatic, has a huge clear aperture of about 32mm, and gives a field width of about 40mm with some vignetting, at a lens-to-subject distance of a bit over 10 cm. Using a 2x teleconverter doubles the magnification and halves the working distance on all my supplemental lenses..

Here's the rig assembled with the Vivitar 28-210mm element mounted on the Isco.The two foil reflectors clipped to the threaded rods are adjusted to direct additional flash lighting to the diffuser. Behind the supplemental lens you can see the knurled rubber ring used to "lock" the Isco at infinity. This was scavenged from a junk lens and was the right size to work onto the Isco. It still allows the lens to focus properly, but totally protects against accidentally altering the focus. The 85mm is fitted with a similar band.

Here's an oblique side view showing how the reflector support posts are rigged, plus how the diffuser is mounted on the old tripod mount. The reflectors can be mounted inside or outside the posts. The black clip provides more clearance for my right hand to operate the camera than clothes pins would, as used on the left reflector.

Here's a bracket I've rigged for night photography. It's particularly useful for shooting when the Isco is mounted on my old 200mm Micro-Nikkor. The cross-bar prevents the arms from shifting position and is a convenient place to mount a small positionable flashlight used for focusing. This "focus assist" light is pre-aimed to provide illumination at the point of focus. The black "flap" is my "direct flash" shield, which mounts like a lens cap onto the front of any of my supplemental lenses. It's positioned to block direct light from the camera pop-up flash, or small speedlight, from striking the subject, creating flat lighting and overexposure. All shooting is done in the fully manual mode, usually at f/16 to f/32 (200mm Micro-Nikkor). Flash lighting is redirected around the end of the lens by the reflectors, which can be adjusted to vary light intensity and shadow angle from either side. The shield is made from a Raynox UAC-2000 universal lens adapter sold with several Raynox close-up lenses, but available for purchase separately. The black flap material is cut from a polypropylene plastic notebook divider. The lens mounted on the Iscorama is the objective from a junk Soligor 450mm lens... extremely sharp, and has a great flat field. It gives a field width of 12.5 cm at a working distance of 31 cm.

Here's the night photography set-up all ready to go. 

This nursery web spider and nestful of hatchlings was taken in complete darkness with the rig shown in the previous photo, but with a bowl diffuser mounted on the lens instead of the light shield. The reflectors were positioned to direct additional light onto the subject. I have several bowl diffusers that can mount on a lens just like the direct flash shield, with the Raynox adapter.

This last photo shows a partial inventory of supplemental lenses for using on the Iscorama, most being front cells from junk lenses. Although I have add-on lenses by different manufactures that are from lenses of the same focal length, they produce different "bokeh" and have variability in flatness of field, image color bias, and contrast. 
If you have any questions, need additional info, or whatever... just ask. Thanks!

I posted this in my other thread, but it's kind of hidden and not everyone would think of looking there. I've spent the past few weeks working on reviewing the Rectilux 3FF-W, paired with a Kowa B&H inside. Taking lenses are Contax Zeiss and an old Nikon which I regret picking up. Camera is the Canon 5D3, shooting RAW everytime.
There are charts, flares, vignetting and a real world test there. Check the video and a written review at http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7742
Subscribe to my channel (http://youtube.com/tferradans) for upcoming reviews and anamorphic content!

Hi Julian...
Thanks for the response. After a close family friend passed away years ago I arranged for the sale of his old Arriflex II-C camera, His Iscorama lens was given to me by his niece as a "thank you". I've used it for years, shooting slides, then shelved it when I "went digital". Several years ago I stumbled across the EOSHD website and it rekindled my interest in using it for digital work. It's only fairly recently that I've played around with it with the idea of adapting it for close-up shooting. I'm still not fully up to speed with it when working at close distances. The very shallow DOF at high magnifications is a problem, and working with mongrel supplementary lenses scavenged from junk lenses is "iffy" at times. There's a tremendous amount of variability in image quality when I mount add-on lenses on the Isco, depending upon which primary lens I'm using. Through quite a bit of testing I've created separate sets of supplementary lenses to work with the Isco when mounted on specific primary lenses. A few of my add-on lenses do vignette a bit, which is cropped away preserving the normal decompressed aspect ratio. I haven't run any focus / compression tests at anything closer than about three feet, but feel as you do, that if I leave the Isco at infinity there probably won't be a shift in the amount of "squeeze". 
Here are a few sample images, all taken using an old Nikkor-H 85mm f/1.8...  stopped down to f/16 or f/22, with a variety of supplemental lenses. The 85 and the Iscorama both have their focusing ring "locked" at infinity with wide rubber bands, focusing is achieved by moving the camera. Lighting is from either the pop-up flash, or a small speedlight bounced off foil covered cards or shot through a home-made bowl diffuser.

Forget-me-nots, 85mm Nikkor-H, Iscorama, objective from a junk Soligor 450mm reverse mounted on the Isco.
 

Orb weaver leg regeneration, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscorama, Soligor 450mm objective. I really like the bokeh here (out of focus evergreen branches).
 

Web repair, 85mm with Iscorama, Soligor 450mm objective reversed on the Isco, with a Soligor 90-230mm zoom lens objective reversed on the 450mm.
 

Bee, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscoama, with a Soligor 90-230mm objective reversed on the Isco, and a Panagor 85-205mm objective reversed on the Soligor.
 

Freshly moulted Funnel Weaver, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscorama, with the objective from a Vivitar 28-210mm zoom lens reversed on the Isco. 
 

Tiny fly, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscorama, and the objective from the Vivitar 28-210 reversed on the Isco.
 

Baby funnel weaver with a fruit fly, Nikkor-H 85mm, Iscorama, and a Raynox MSN-202 close up lens on the Isco. This add-on lens is mounted on an adapter ring that fits the Isco, not in the "snap-on" adapter supplied by Raynox.
The results I've been getting with the Iscorama are very encouraging. It's been great for general photography, but seems to work well up close too. Shooting anamorphic macro images is great... but there are a huge amount of "throw-aways"... more than with using a macro lens without the Iscorama. Shooting extreme close-ups with the Isco is probably "pushing the envelope" a bit, but I'm getting enough decent images to keep me at it. I've been asked why I'm "wasting my time" with the old isco, and been advised that shooting wide angle and cropping might be easier. Having done that years ago... there's no comparison. I just like the look and feel of the anamorphic images better. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

more anaMOREphic...
 
 

Here is The Rectilux 3FF-W with a 25mm from SLR Magic at T/2.8 on a GH4. I'm prepping for another feature in the next couple months and wanted to start making direct comparisons between the Kowa Bell & Howell and the Schneider ES Cinelux. First, I wanted to see CUs of an actor as well as some focus pulls. 
 
 
 
 

http://www.fdtimes.com/2015/05/10/anamorphic-118-page-review/

Wrong aspect ratio. Let me fix that for you:

​I saved the article as a PDF. You can read it here:
boydhobbs.com-Legend of CE Woolman for Delta.pdf

​I saved the article as a PDF. You can read it here:
boydhobbs.com-Legend of CE Woolman for Delta.pdf

FM Lens rack focusing test ‪#‎FMLens‬ ‪#‎Anamorphicshop‬ 
Super Takumar 50mm f1.4, Isco Ultra Star Anamorphic Lens, Panasonic GH4 
Did some tests with the FM. So far loving it, its working perfectly now that I've gotten used to it a little bit and also solved the slouching problem i had initially. It takes some time to get it configured to your rig and camera but oh man smooth rack focusing is orgasmic after a long period of painful double focusing. And I like the fact that it protects the anamorphic glass elements inside. Only downside I see is your rig becoming considerably heavier but thats not always a bad thing. Will do a review and full test at some point.

Well it looks like someone does…
 
 

Well it looks like someone does…
 
 

Well it looks like someone does…
 
 

IMO there is a fine line between character and resolution.  4k is simply a marketing term.  Pushed by the technology companies.  We don;t need it and never will need it, but the customer (who pays for our work) will often be susceptible to marketing terms and switch off if something is not 'up to date'.  
Classic case...  Music.  Modern music sucks yet youngsters donlt realise because its all they know.  same with movies.  modern movies suck compared to 1980's hollywood.  
 
But on topic, I think if a anamorphic system will deliver 720p with beautiful character, I'll take that over a boring lens that delivers 4k, 6k or any other number that non creative people like to hide behind rather than make art.
 
 

There's no point in you buying one anyway.  Other than for the obvious point that you'll just try to relist it on ebay for an unrealistic price at a later date like we see from you all the time.  The reason you don't like the setup is because their mentality is a 'fair days work for a fair days pay'.  Improving the community by actually producing something innovative, niche and well priced.  Yours on the other hand just takes from the community by pilfering the market then spamming with ebay adverts of the relisted, usually over priced goods.  This activity only serves to inflate prices of anamorphics making them inaccessible to most people here (I imagine you;ve probably sniped most of us here at one point or another).  You very rarely contribute anything else.
 
http://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/ioannis-aix  You have multiple copies of lenses for sale meaning your purpose is resale rather than collection or use.  
 
From now on I'll be watching your contributions here more closely.  As a moderator I'll be hoping to see at least one helpful thread or post from you for every ebay link you post.  Hows that?  Lets make this place productive and creative rather than a place of business!  

I'm in as well.

Price announced, â‚¬550
 
http://on.fb.me/1uiTplk
 
SLR Magic 2x, FM Lens Focus Module, Rectilux.. the heat is on!

bravo FM module.  Test samples and price are both attractive. 
 
I have two cinelux 2x schneiders I grabbed very cheap this week.  being able to focus these badboys is gonna be a dream.