Jump to content

Russell Anway

Members
  • Content Count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Russell Anway

  1. Apologies, but I had to make this private because this was invited to a film festival and they're interested in premiere status etc. Sorry for the busted post/link. Mods, feel free to delete, or I'll amend later after festival announcements have been made and etc. Thanks.
  2. This is a short documentary I did this past summer about a mushroom farm here in Minneapolis. https://vimeo.com/156486010 I shot this on my a7s with my Lomo squarefronts. The 50mm was the workhorse and I mostly switched between full frame and s35 to zoom in and out a bit. The 35 did some work as well and I dollied the 80 for a few of the mushroom "money" shots. I have one more segment like this shot (urban bee researchers with bee hives (apiaries!) on rooftops around the city). The plan is to shoot four or five more of these and edit it into a feature. The mushroom farm wa
  3. Anyone know anyone know if video assist does a de-squeeze? I couldn't find any mention, and that's usually a no. Firmware maybe? Probably? I don't know if Blackmagic has a history of implementing that feature or not.
  4. This isn't really a lens solution, but I'm sure you could return it. I see that it's listed "no returns," but that doesn't apply if the seller told you something that is materially false. Buyer protection extends to messages, not just the listing. If he's telling you that he misspoke, then you have it in writing that you were furnished with false information, and in a way that made the lens seem more valuable than it was. If you could get it in writing from a lens tech that the anamorphic block is damaged, and pair that with the message saying the anamorphic block is perfect, I don't think
  5. It's true that the 50mm and the 80mm will cover the full frame sensor, but its also important to understand that the areas outside of the super35 image circle weren't a part of the quality control process. So the image there will be more degraded, sometimes extremely so. My 50mm is basically sharp wide open, but it vignettes significantly between T2.5 and T2.8, but if its on a full frame instead of apsc, the effect is extreme, and obvious to the naked eye. That might be fine in some shots (a portrait or other lock down shot), but panning across a white background at a wide stop on FF would
  6. Check out the diopter thread my man! It's pretty much the most comprehensive discussion of large diopters for anamorphic lenses on the whole interwebs. Only a few links above this one! 100mm is pretty big though, so "affordable" is going to be tough!
  7. Yeah, they are nice glass. Mounting them is an issue still and at the moment the plan is likely to superglue a 95mm thread onto the back. Not elegant but I have a project to shoot soon and there isn't time to keep screwing around with filters much longer. I did negotiate a little discount on them since they weren't as described but I'd honestly have been a lot happier if they'd just been 95 and simple. I spent months hustling before I worked something out with redstan, and spent another month sourcing about 20 different parts to buy the diopter in trade, so I feel your pain!
  8. It might be worth emailing redstan. I emailed him when he was sold out but still was able to secure a +.25 82mm in trade that was not officially for sale (someone bailed on paying him after begging to reserve it so he sold it to me since I had money in hand).
  9. Thanks for the response, I did find that thread as well, it's definitely not 107 on the back, but could be the diameter of the front. I may have to do something insane like busting the glass out of a big uv filter and super gluing it onto the backs of the diopters. That would be real sad though. im still hoping the cavision thing was somehow non-standard.
  10. Looking for a little help on some diopters, hoping someone has the info I'm looking for. I just bought a pair of Angenieux diopters. These specifically http://www.ebay.com/itm/281716858980?_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT I contacted the seller to find out what the thread was and he said they were 95mm, so I bought them, and bought this http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/981558-REG/cavision_art105_95_threaded_adapter_ring.html The goal here is to build a filter mounting system with thread size of 95mm that can be mounted to rails which could be used with lomo
  11. I'll second ceico7. Stuff I've got from ebay from untested sources has nearly always proved to be a waste of time/money. So I just pay for that good polish stuff now. The one thing I'll point out is that if the pin is out of alignment it won't matter on the foton-A like it does on other anamorphics. Normally, for example any of the OCT19 lenses, it would skew the image, but that won't be an issues with the foton since it is a two piece lens and the anamorphic portion is aligned to the rails, and not to the mount. So the spherical will be "out of alignment", but the anamorphic part will be
  12. Wait waaaah? Both of them? I know the one in the first picture is an oct19 but what about the one in the back left of the photo of your collection with the after-market metal ring, mounted on rails? Is that really not a conversion?
  13. Who did the conversion of your oct18 35mm to single piece? Recommended?
  14. I don't totally follow your workflow, but the first one looks 100% correct. Moreover, in premiere it's easy to check, there are percentages beside your pixel number, and if you are finalizing in a 1080p frame (and why would you final in anything bigger when nearly no one's monitors can display that added detail?) your aspect ratio really doesn't matter, there is no standard for web. So if the percent value of your height is half of the percent value of your width then your desqueeze is right. Pixels are sort of beside the point, since you are really after the ratio. That's it. I usually do s
  15. I've never used the minolta diopter specifically, but I can vouch for the minolta glass of that vintage. I have a 24mm, a 58mm and the 35-70 zoom and their all really nice lenses, as is their reputation. It's older so I'm sure standard older glass warnings apply, but i've read on DP review that its a good diopter. I think its not a terribly prized diopter just because its only 55mm thread (almost all the minolta lenses from back then are 55) and that's pretty small for today. But if it works for you I'm sure its a fine choice.
  16. It's unfortunate they haven't responded. But I'm like 99% sure it doesn't do it. A bunch of people online seem to be noting the lack of feature. I can't find anything in the official literature, but that's not terribly surprising since "Not included features" isn't typically something you find on a press release.
  17. No worries. I appreciate it. Some of this info is really hard to come by and this thread is still the best resource on diopters/anamorphics I'm aware of.
  18. Tito, Do you know if I put a doublet on my lomo squarefronts if I'll be able to shoot them down to T3, or maybe T2.8? Right now they're good at around T4. I'm thinking about buying some large achromatics but they're pretty expensive and I'd like to know how much image improvement I can expect before I drop the cash. The Tiffen's you recommended are nice for close focus but I'd love to be able to open the aperture up a bit. I'm asking you because you're one of the few on here with experience with squarefronts. Any guidance is much appreciated! Thank you!
  19. This is sort of a demo video/just for kicks piece with some footage I've shot this year. I think I'll be out shooting a few more times in the next month to add to it and I'll update it here. I shot it with a lomo 35mm and 80mm squarefronts. It's a mix of gh1 and A7s (lets see if you can notice the difference ;) I do a fair amount of hip-hop stuff and just wanted to put something together that had a different style and flavor than your typical 60 second promo. And shooting on anamorphics definitely affects the way you can work on these sorts of things. At the b-boy show I did 3/4 of
  20. I'll second this. I can't find the info either. Anyone?
  21. That mustHD actually looks like it might be a really solid choice. I'm having a hard time finding its full specs though, do you know if it does a 2x squeeze for aspect ratio? I saw a video of someone flipping through settings, but didn't think I saw an exact 2x but rather a 2.35:1.
  22. Would anyone who shoots Lomo squarefronts care to shout out what they use for diopters? I know Tito mentioned it, generally, at the beginning. But the 35mm is giving me a really hard time. I had been using series 9 tiffens (thanks for the original recommendation), but when I switched from a Gh1 to the A7s the increase in sensor size has made the series 9 super borderline. Even if I didn't care about money and was prepared to buy $2k diopter I don't think schneider even makes (or made?) a 138mm +.5 achromat. I know that sounds like a tall order but that's essentially what I'm looking fo
  23. I mean when you shoot anamorphic you tend to literally place the camera further back than you would if you were shooting spherical. Though I think this is mostly because anamorphic ends up being 2.4:1 or so (after crop), instead of 16x9 for most other applications. If you were cropping to cinema aspect ratio and shooting with sphericals I'd imagine you'd tend to back up a bit also. Also, http://www.eoshd.com/2010/10/the-anamorphic-miracle-filter/ What you're describing is normal. It is just fairly rare to find something that covers the key bases of, achromatic, affordable, very low p
  24. dwijip, That diopter you're linking looks suspicious to me. A couple things, it doesn't have a brand so there's no way to know what kind of glass it is. It's in a rotating housing, which is incredibly pointless. It makes me think its homemade, and someone popped the a polarizer out of its frame and put this piece of glass in. The other thing is that this guy seems to be saying that even though this lens is a singlet it's just as good as the doublets aka achromat's. In a doublet each of the lenses are coated with different types of chemicals, and when light passes through each of th
×
×
  • Create New...