ken
-
Posts
573 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Everything posted by ken
-
But I know for M43 sensor is 4:3, and 2x lens I used as 1.875x for most restoration. So the ratio is only 2.5:1. BTW, there is a 1.5x lens price for reference: http://www.ebay.com/itm/221431697341
-
How come much more expensive than 16h/8z? Do you think the 1.5x lens has more worthy than 2x lens? or just rare?
-
You are misleading, sir.
-
Focus length is nothing, not represent view angle, if don't know the CMOS size. I think that is M43 system, 50mm lens equals to 100mm, and still has vignette. Looks like Sankor M lens is not winder than ISCO integrated lens, which has little vignette with 85mm at infinity, but ok with 100mm. BTW, 85mm lens with 16h/8z has none vignette on full frame.
-
Looks like the sun lens is more likely the same as other 16? lens, except 16h/8z, which it's length is shorter than diameter, the most wide angle 2x projector lens.
-
IMO, ISCO integrated lens, around $100. Better optics and wider then other 16x lens, except 16H. I have posted the test result before.
- 4 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- 2x
- anamorphic
- (and 3 more)
-
You can refer to my way of mounting 16h on my Gallery, cost at $10 range or below.
-
"This lens works best at 50mm and up on m43 cameras..." not wide enough, FL is too long
-
Advice on eBay anamorphic lens listing (No advertising)
ken replied to Andrew Reid's topic in Cameras
recently auction price is more reasonable, but not exact the same lens. http://www.ebay.com/itm/390822040588 -
Good old style color tone, but unfortunately not alignment yet.
-
Canon EF100 F2 would be better, if EF85 vignetting. Both lenses are twin. EF100 gets even higher score than EF85 from comparison on dxomark.com
-
One thing many people ignore is anamorphic storage makes more effective pixel available, whatever lens, film or digital storage. The vertical resolution is twice high in lens. To people's eyes view, vertical resolution is more important than horizontals. If you know video development in recent years. I.e, not difference from SVCD and DVD. Even now, the digital TV 1080i, 16:9, but storage is still 4:3 effective pixels. Horizontal pixel 1920 is expanded by 1440 effective pixels.
-
F4 or F2.8? IMO, ISCO HD attachment should work on both, but need 100mm or above. ISCO integrated is ok for F4 lens, merely to 85mm. But better to use 16H instead, will almost cover to 70mm.
-
Any one knows whether coating is the main factor for flaring? Or optical structure is the key?
-
You can shot 50mm on FF, but you got a square raw image, then expend it to close 2:1(I use 1.875 most time) to restore to normal image. Sorry, I don't shot video, not care/sure/tested flare and bokeh. Please let others answer.
-
Usually said 16h could use with 50mm in APS-C. One of B&H=16h for sure, but saw some vintage B&H lens is different. I think B&H is just a brand name.
-
My previous posts could answer that.
-
interested, but you only sell to buyers within UK.
-
One of my ISCO lens is decorated. :D
-
IMO, mounting 16H is too simple. I found two ways. First method needs glue to secure it, recommend hot melt glue.
-
I just post my test on flaring. >
-
Based on my test, blue star and blank star lens have different flare performance due to coating difference, see pictures. The blue star lens has none, but blue star lens has a little bit, at least I can use it to do alignment adjustment. From serial number to tell, blue star lens is older. #5 tested picture was from blank star lens. If not care flaring, both lenses' sharpness and view angle have no difference at all.
-
I said before, 16H is about 75mm minimum on FF. here is 70mm sample. Also depends on focus distance, closer will be better, infinity is poorest.
-
imo, 16h can go to below 75mm in ff. I also use EF 85mm sometimes, but just somewhat waste it. ISCO integrated lens can do it.
-
IMO, ISCO integrated lens is good enough, even better than other 16x lens, except 16h. '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>