Jump to content

Matthias Malleši�

Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Matthias Malleši�

  1. Looks like glass chips to me, can happen when the lens is fastened to the metal ring...Have no effect on image if not in the critical place.
  2. Nice work; to my opinion some deskewing could be done at some scenes...
  3. Yes, the price was less than 10e (postage included). Mine comes at 52mm (probably will do for Sun Anamorphic and Schneider Cinelux, will post some results, when done).
  4. I don't think they're the same, probably similar design and different manufacturer. Have only sun 16 out of lens mentioned, so can't tell you exactly...
  5. Your video looks a bit dreamy, which cam was used? Taking lens and anamorphic should be focused, both of them. Anyway, you choose the SEQUENCE settings upon the ratio you want to get in the final product. I prefer 1:2,35; if you'd like to have 1:2,66, you would do for example 2880x1080pix sequence. You want to preserve during editing most of original vertical resolution your camera outputs. Then you stretch the horizontal as much as needed for choosen sequence to look natural (or the circles look natural). I have modified some lens for closer focus. In that case it came out 1,5 to 1.6 ratio for 2x anamorphic lens. Anyway, sides (with 16:9 sensor) would be cropped out, as we have interest only in specified final ratio. Then you render to 1920x816 (2.35), 1920x720 (2,67) or 2560x1080 - as you like...
  6. 1920x820 is not 2,66 ratio. I personally use 1920x816 (or 800), as you like. This is only for rendering. Editing should be done in higher resolution, for example 2560x1080 (sequence) or even more. With stretching only horizontal to cca 190% for 2x anamorphics(or as you like) you crop the sides off, You can move the image left or right in EFFECTS-Motion MENU. Then apply some effects, if you want and render to 2560x1080 or 1920x816, as you like - as this is final product. This works for me, somebody else has probably different approach. Regards
  7. 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)....
  8. Zeiss 63/2x is sure for keep; Kiptar and Sankor, too. Rectimascopes are OK, especially smaller ones (48/2x), about B&L and meopta can't tell.
  9. Excellent results. I'm having two 35-2-3s, one of them waiting to be modified something like yours in spring...thx for info..
  10. My opinion is that the anamorphic shooting is not really suited for handheld shots. At first I was really caught on choosing the right stretch, but now I opt for stretch that looks just right to me (not necesarry the exact one). I think that is also a magic of it, not being always on 100% real measure. I edit mainly in Vegas, there's SONY DISTORT effect plugin, shifting only Y axis - when necesarry...
  11. I was one of the bidders, last 4 seconds just gone wild...
  12. I have two of them. I guess you're lens aren't collimated properly. Have a test with someone pointing a flashlight towards you (not laser!!). Flare lines must be parallel to each other. Will check one of mine and post some info later.
  13. http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/707/dvu9.jpg/ sun 16, taking lens 1m from object, no etc, no diopter
  14. I do modifications on big to medium lens, the last one modified Moller 63/2x minimum fd was 1,8m (6ft) until couple of days ago, when modified even further, haven't tested it yet. The price of modification for lens is 250-500€. Optional rehousings available. Waiting time 30-60 days. Servicing starts at 85€, waiting time 7-14 days. You pay shipping charges both ways.
  15. I will surely use it for one of my next short-film projects, the whole project will be filmed through this lens. By the way, here's my last one (one week ago, non-anamorphic GF3 short-film): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAKYvZ_seRw
  16. Well, Toni..this lens was not really intended for handheld shooting. For 15,50e it came cheap and I wouldn't mind if they would not work at all, having it hung down from the upper corner of my workshop....but owning a piece of history it seemed as a nice idea (besides already having smaller anamorphics for hhs) and I wanted to experiment with prism-design anamorphic...it surely needs some longer focal length taking lens, but yesterday I finally figured out how ETC on my camera (cropped sensor) is supposed to be working...not on 1080i AVCHD, but only on 720p AVCHD or MJPEG (80-140Mb/s)....Years ago I used to be Betacam operator, so on the other hand I don't mind using heavier gear, in fact it's easier to hold it without shakes....
  17. Today just arrived Tushinsky variable ration anamorphic projection lens. Some tests I made today didn't prove much useful (shot with GF3 with ETC), will post some more in next days. I haven't found any videos made through this adapter on the net. Anybody's got some experience with this beast? [url=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/11/9djw.jpg/][/URL] [url=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/823/f8aw.jpg/][/URL]
  18. No, wide open is not sharp enough. These days I will check the exact stretch, with various distances. The photo was sharpened a little afterwards and will check the alignement once more (with Full HD monitor), althought I'm quite close now on alignement..... Some examples, some of them shot almost wide open, with a little sharpening in post... [url=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/53bc.jpg/][/URL] [url=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/689/z7pn.jpg/][/URL] [url=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/707/dvu9.jpg/][/URL] It seems that closer objects are easier to shot almost wide open, distant objects require more closing of the blades...
×
×
  • Create New...