Timotheus

16 hours ago, dontthroworanges said:

I would like to use the 72mm version of the Rangefinder to keep the cost and size down. Thoughts on 77mm vs 72mm?

There are no direct comparisons online, but the optical quality should be the same. Perhaps the 77mm vignettes at a tad wider focal lengths? Although this is probably only true when the rear elements difffer in size between the two versions...The front sizes are the same (82mm). Could be that the glass is exactly the same size, with only the mounting thread differing in size.

2 hours ago, Justin Bacle said:

The 72mm SLR Magic Rangefinder version w/o marking is not produced anymore (as confirmed by email discussion with them).

Is this true? Damn...get them while they last then. Still for sale on ebay, B&H and so on...

Check out the other current thread with the exact same question: 

Just weighing in on the 18-35: own it, brilliant lens. It is for APS-C camera's, so you can use it in crop mode on the a7s2.
It then gives a FOV / DOF comparable to something like a 27-52mm F2.7 fullframe lens.
Using the Clear Image Zoom function, the Sigma can also function as a normal / slight telephoto zoom!

Adding a speedbooster won't help as the lens' image circle doesn't fill the fullframe sensor.

Great. Final question then (I think ;-)). How much does minimum focus distance change? I believe the Rangefinder's MFD is approximately (a not-too-bad) 1m. What happens when the Tokina is included? Thanks again.

1 hour ago, Caleb Genheimer said:

That's where it fits. The Tokina ATX is very, very good. But it's a 72mm filter, so it goes on the 72mm Redstan. Then the step up to 77mm, with the rangefinder finally on front. I think the Rangefinder front is something like 82mm, so there would be serious vignetting with the Tokina on front.

Sounds good. Never heard about this setup, thanks for sharing! Effect on focusing is the same as without the RF? So 1/0.4= 2.5m as maximum focus distance?

As the optical principle of RF, coreDNA and vintage single focus solutions (iscorama) is the same (variable diopter), I would be surprised if there are large differences in things like defocus quality etc. But that's an educated guess, could be wrong.

I just received my 72mm RF, tested it briefly and yes, the blue blobs are easily summoned ;-) I do intend to try a cheap circular hood on the RF to see if it helps. At any rate, the thing is built like a tank and finally being able to more easily use my anamorphics will be a relief.

4 hours ago, Caleb Genheimer said:

Sometimes I put my Tokina ATX diopter behind the Rangefinder. Then it creates a tiny vignette in the corners at 2.40:1 ratio. 

Hi Caleb, could you elaborate on the purpose of putting the diopter in there? I gather close focus, but why not put it up front?

Cheers, Tim

Yeah, I think you made a good deal, even considering the scratch. So I'd take his discount and go shoot :-)

For me it's been the other way around. My photography got more serious after buying a 70D and some quality lenses in 2013...then the cool video options on the thing (DPAF!) got me reading on DSLR video... Before I knew I got a collection of vintage glass (Takumars, some Russians and a set of anamorphics...so much for DPAF haha) and a G7, but way too little time...just have to take it slow, I guess.

But coming here is easy, reading and learning. I like my niche...and this forum! :-)

Brilliant. Wonder If this was always the plan, or that they realized their 'cine potential' after the 18-35mm became such a hit.

These will be huge, if their pricing remains as competitie as it is in the photography world.

Nice to see a 85mm make it on the list. That means the much anticipated 'photographic' 85mm is on it's way too.

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

 

Yeah, not quite sure what to make of that vid. Interviewer promises hard questions...eh? Does not seem too knowledgeable either. Simply accepting the explanation on the codec and crop, no questions (I believe) on missing basic video features as peaking and giving the general impression of just being very happy to be invited...

But the rep makes Canon's goals clear: 100% reliability from a camera that is primarily for stills, but can produce quality video as well.

Doesn't sound too ambitious for this price range and from a camera line with this legacy. As such they leave a lot of room for the competition to sweep up hybrid shooters. Based on specs/value, but also on people's dissappointment and feeling of not being taken seriously.

One can hope that that hybrid userbase and their buying decisions are significant enough to make Canon change its ways (...and surprise the world with a nice feature-rich firmware update) :-)

2 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

EDIT: Just found this. Look's like it's definitely possible on the Ursa Mini.

 

Aaron, that vid sure looks good but it's made with an 'anamorfake'...Just a modified oval aperture + crop, no true anamorphic glass used ;-)

Btw, Takumar 35mm F2 is a very nice lens.

Congratulations on your purchase. Any idea how the single focus mod works?

Cheers, Tim

Yeah, this is some troubling stuff. The selfdestructiveness and irrationality...

Just to give a follow up on my and @IshootbeforeItalk's (Tomas) experience since that megathread ended: under the pressure here, ES sent Tomas his Rangefinder to sell and make up for our loss. It was working but had a wonky rear thread, that meant we had to sell it with a discount. So we're still in the red (around 125 euro combined), but it's something...

Now I just hope ES can come to his senses and clean up the mess he's made. But I guess his apparent inability or unwillingness is part of his issues... 

Holy crap 340 bucks for that Zacuto support! Thanks again for the tips, I'll keep an eye out for used gear as well ;-)

At least that crop means there's some good APS-C glass to use for 4K (Sigma 18-35, 50-100)

:-/

Thanks Bioskop for the tip on the redstan clamp. I would indeed prefer it that the Isco would have two secured support points. The redstan on the back, combined with a support on the front might do the trick. The circumference of the front is huge though, so it might be hard to find a solution that secures the lens all around. Perhaps some tie-wrap will come in handy ;-)

Initially I was thinking of using the Lanparte lens support to go around some 77mm rings stacked on the back filter thread. This combined with a support up front. But the rubber might not be quite as up to the task as redstan's clamp...

Hi all, interested in hearing about mounting solutions for Iscorama 54 and/or Isco 16:9 Video Attachment. How do you keep it safe and (super)stable on 15mm rods? What type of support or lens collars do you use?

I have one specific wish, as I would like to have the Isco secured to the rails without having to physically attach it to the taking lens. In this way I can remove the camera by it's cage handle for some lighter-weight shooting without the rail system.

I already read through this older topic, but am looking for a more sturdy setup.

Keen to hear your solutions, thanks!

Great tinkering @HellVideoRazor. I look in amazement as it is far beyond my abilities haha...But I am a bit confused, do the Rathenower or Möller have anything to do with the Panatar from @ken's post?

How is that Panatar anyway Ken? Looks like a big lens, but it's single focus you say? Can't find anything on it online, except for this old thread from here...

Haha, I feel dumb now cause the 16:9 part is kinda obvious (mine says that too yes). So 1.33x it is and I guess this guy is wrong :-)

l'll be ordering the regular step rings. Thanks again Tito.

Thanks @tferradans. On the version: I have one without numerical, so just "Isco Video Attachment". I read somewhere that it's actually 1.42x, but to my eyes stretching by 1.33x looks better. Have to do some formal testing though.

So by regular 95mm you mean 0.75mm thread pitch?
I think i can see that the thread pitch on mine is wider/deeper (probably 1mm).
Perhaps I'll just take my chances on a cheap chinese step ring, they go for a few euros on ebay.

Hi all, simple question, can't seem to find a good answer so I thought I'd just ask the knowledgeable crowd here.

So I found an Isco Video Attachment (same design as Iscorama 54, just different stretch factor).

Besides being heavy, MFD is 2m which also impacts practical shooting. I have some 82mm and 86mm diopters to use so I would like to buy a step ring.

Front filter size is 95mm. Thread pitch is larger than normal though...Does anyone know it's specifications and/or have suggestions for suitable step rings? Thanks a lot!

Guys. A few deep breaths might be helpful. Believe me, I am as angry as anyone here and I want to be compensated. Ebrahim has committed himself to do something about that in the coming day, and providing evidence of it. We shall see about that quickly enough.

Regardless, there is the issue of proportionality one how one should respond, certainly if you're not directly affected. Who decides what the 'punishment' should be and who should deliver it? I think @dhessel made some similar remarks. I feel this community (and it's administrators) can decide how to deal with the situation here. Whether that means a ban or keeping this thread on the site can be debated.

Reaching out to a large pool of strangers (Ebrahim's contacts) and dragging them into this mess might be a bit much at this point, though. But that's just my 2 cents ... (or actually $275...blegh).

24 minutes ago, squig said:

I reported the rangefinder ad on dvxuser as fraudulent (it was still there), the mods have now taken it down. Was it listed somewhere else?

Thanks squig. It was also up on reduser but someone already pointed to this thread.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?134422-SLR-Magic-Rangefinder-very-interesting/page2&s=8fd7b48cbe3ad94297cb040334deef83

@tweak Note that we're talking about a 2014 post here. It's factual content is correct. That was all.