elgabogomez

Check out the test video of the Rapido Single Focus Solution, my setup is as follows:
Camera: GH4 Taking Lens: Rokion 85mm T1.5 Cine Lens for CANON Anamorphic Lens:  KOWA for Bell & Howell Anamorphic Clamp: Rapido V2 Clamp ISO setting: 1600 Shutter speed: 400 Aperture: T1.5 Video format: MOV, FHD Aspect ratio: 3.556:1 (1920:1080 with 2X anamorphic squeeze) The minimum focus is 1 meter. Different anamorphic lenses are used as focus targets,  set between 1 meter and 2.5 meters from the camera.  The video shows racking focusing from close focus to infinity.
The aperture is kept wide open at T1.5. There is no sharpness drop comparing to the original Kowa & Rokinon combination, and there is no change of the original flare/bokeh character from the anamorphic lens.  This is the main difference comparing to other Single Focus Solutions, like SLR Magics, FM Module, and Rectilux.
More test videos will be uploaded soon.
Youtube video is here: https://youtu.be/h96fqNsKpEI
Vimeo video is here: https://vimeo.com/206798264  (better resolution)
Music: Cloud by Ehrling, link: https://soundcloud.com/ehrling/ehrling-clouds

35NAP 2-2 (mod) | Helios 44-2 F:2 (VariND) | Sony A6300 (SLog3 | ISO800)
 

lomo 35mm fullframe )

I agree with you Ed. 
I had a music video nominated for a Metal Hammer award, they played it on the big screen for a bit. I was blown away by the quality. It was shot in a GH3. 
Sat back, I also saw a test clip on Vimeo I thought was the Alexa. No, it was actually the 8-bit A6300 in Slog3. 
I'm also gobsmacked how much better my videos look on an iPad or iPhone. Noise is gone. Images I thought were soft actually resolve brilliantly. Most is low bitrate footage. 
We all know that content is most important. With cameras, they're all good enough to realise that content. The skill is choosing the correct characteristics for that content and maximising a cameras capabilities. 
I've got little interest in the "camera race" at the moment, it's extremely minor in the scheme of things. 

Yeah, it's not really "seeing in the shadows " but allowing your subject to have enough light to be recognizable and separated enough from background. I also have the 1.4 but didn't take it cause the big front element would get scratched with the back element of the kowa that close to it, it vignettes notably in the corners even sitting in the canon front ring that has the lens info.
Yes to the kowa 16s, if you don't shoot directly to a big light it can be sharp enough at F1.8, better at 2.8. It goes cheaper than the 16h type and is lighter in weight  but can't be used with wider lenses.
It's going to be a suspense/terror short so it's fine to feel uncomfortable

it is a low light scouting with the a6300. I believe 1600 was the max iso. Lens turbo + 50mm 1.8 canon fd + kowa 16s

Maybe on a 4:3 crop you feel less guilty of the crop, when reviewing your footage the 3.56:1 composition sometimes looks so great that you don't want to adhere to the cinema "standard", if the camera is doing it for you is as we say in México "eyes that don't see, heart that doesn't feel " (ojos que no ven, corazón que no siente) :D

We have the same saying in Brazil! :D
Yeah, in the case of ML, cropping goes smoother on the card.
I was thinking and maybe I didn't express myself quite right at the start. I started this rant because of the amount of messages I get from people saying "My camera doesn't have a 4:3 mode, so I'm not able to use 2x stretch lenses" and stuff like that. I don't know what leads them to think that.

Maybe on a 4:3 crop you feel less guilty of the crop, when reviewing your footage the 3.56:1 composition sometimes looks so great that you don't want to adhere to the cinema "standard", if the camera is doing it for you is as we say in México "eyes that don't see, heart that doesn't feel " (ojos que no ven, corazón que no siente) :D

Maybe on a 4:3 crop you feel less guilty of the crop, when reviewing your footage the 3.56:1 composition sometimes looks so great that you don't want to adhere to the cinema "standard", if the camera is doing it for you is as we say in México "eyes that don't see, heart that doesn't feel " (ojos que no ven, corazón que no siente) :D

I'd say both, it's great to have more vertical resolution, but having to crop less is more "storage efficient" to me. (with magic lantern being limited by the card write speeds, it's easier to achieve more vertical resolution in 3:2 or 4:3 than in 16:9  )
I actually shoot more in 3:2 with magic lantern as it allows slight movement in the shot in post if wanted, but 16:9 is just too much cropping to me.

now THIS is more like the arguments I was looking for. When it comes to the GH4 (and 5 - as well as any Canon shooting ML RAW) I know they have increased sensor height when shooting 4:3, but most people requesting the feature just seem to neglect that.
I didn't mention before, but this thread is a case study for an upcoming episode. I want to make people realize that "just" a 4:3 crop is no big deal. :P

I think that it's important to look less at the specific aspect ratio of the sensor than at the height of the sensor, especially when it comes to using professional anamorphic lenses. When shooting for a 2.40 aspect ratio, having a taller sensor means using more of the field of view of the lens. And this comes into play when using older lenses that may not have the wide angle options, or have wide angle lenses that are unusually large or oddly shaped. At my job, I have compared Lomo anamorphics on the Alexa (18x24mm sensor) and the Red Dragon (15x30mm sensor). On the Alexa, you can more or less get way with using the 50mm as your widest lens. On the Red, the 50mm is more like a 60mm, and you're gonna be relying more on the 35mm Lomo, which is a big heavy lens with a giant front diameter, and a lot more barrel distortion and softer edges. It's just more practical to have a sensor that matches the full height of the 35mm academy format, regardless of whether it is 4:3 or not. And with how high resolution have gotten lately, there's no need to fear cropping. No use crying over spilled pixels.

It's not a "big" problem you are right, and the reframing across the 16:9 to 3.56:1 is helpful indeed. But take my personal camera the a6300 as an example for clear benefits of a 4:3 read: it's the worst rolling shutter of any camera out there, if sony made a paid app to do 4:3 video and still keep everything else the same (codec, bitrate, picture profiles, log, zebras, etc,.) I would be the first to buy it, if you have ever played with the clear zoom of a recent sony and compare it with the regular recording, the most obvious change is less rolling shutter, a bit more noise and an almost invisible less resolution, so imagine the 4:3 crop again, being a crop of the 16:9 frame but with faster readout in the same 100mbps and you have the advantages of the clear image zoom without the disadvantages. Even possibly less chance of banding if the bitrate is properly used. 
Now take the ursa minis or the kinefinity terras as examples, it is a lot less data (either raw or prores) in the anamorphic mode. Enough to impact your workflow because you can have 10 minutes more recording on the same 128gb card and trust me, 10 minutes per card is a big deal in a shooting day for a short or long fiction film.

Single focus AND useable on 40mm full frame?? How is this not being talked more? As usual Tito Ferradans, superb review.

I could be wrong but there appears to be 3 types of kowa 16, the 16h/8z/Elmoscope II/kowa for B&H that has the widest lens elements, then there is the 16s/16d that have de 43mm back (with a smaller back element) and front element is also smaller than 16h type, and finally the 16a/vidoscope that have the smallest back element and the front element is same size as the 16s type. It can get confusing as there are kowa 16 lenses that don't have h or s or a distinction but can be same size as any of them. I only have personal experience with the s and h type and have an h type that only says kowa 16.

And here's the review - 
 

For me it was close encounters of the third kind, after that... Believe it or not, it was the original ghostbusters.

a few of mine, taken at The Efteling - The Netherlands at January 1th 2017. Film in progress... Bolex 16/32/1.5x | Nikon 50mm f 1.8x pancake | Samsung NX1

Zooming in doesn't look that great. I'm suing P2P (pixel to pixel) and it is really sharp and accurate. 
BTW, a brief update: I wrote to FeelWorld pointing out the flaws and they asked me for the monitor serial number. Have yet to hear back from them but I suspect because of Chinese New Year holidays.
I used the FW760 again during the weekend and have to say that it's growing on me. Framing with a 7" monitor, with proper framing mask is a pleasure. False color are invaluable. And I now managed to calibrate the monitor to my liking. If only they could get rid of the issues...
I also wrote to Cinemartin about their new cheap monitor but they didn't reply so far.
Will keep you informed if anyone's interested.

since u mentioned LOMO here's some lomo-look) just ordinary reportage work with a7s and lomo nas 2/75 (everything - wide open), sorry for quality i grabbed it from compressed file

Here is some clips with the anamorphot SLR Magic, the one with the focus module Rangefinder integrated, on LX100
 

I noticed that the menu system is exactly the same as the FeelWorld FW760 I'm testing, so I guess it might be the very same panel just rehoused. Hopefully the Cinemartin will not have the same flaws.

To be fair even with DSLR I always just use Sony np-f batteries externally with them.  A6300 just needs extra work to maintain it's cool from what I've read - external everything and stick a cooling pad behind the monitor!  Of course if you are working on a hot set then all bets are off.  
 
I agree that it is annoying, but for all of us low budgeters just think of all the low budget things we do to make things work... 
 
I should test and shoot more before saying anything but I'm not finding the skin tones from a6500 to be horrendous at all if you tweak the color settings and grade with luts.  

I have the 760 without the update so all it can ingest is 1080, and even in hd there is a latency issue where the image lags and you could see a kind of divided image where it resolves the top third of the frame then the middle then the bottom, sometimes it´s just half the frame...  I´ve learned to live with it since is the cheapest monitor with an anamorphic desqueeze mode. Do you know where can we get the firmware update? It would be helpful for focus.