danreddingvideo
-
Posts
7 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by danreddingvideo
-
-
I might be wrong but it looks like the Helios you have might be the more 'modern' type - has better flare suppression coating on the optics. But it could also be due to the light source. Also if you are shooting smaller than s35 sensor, you will only be capturing part of the Helios' potential for flare - as some of the charm of older Helios models are the 'secondary' rings and rainbows that tend to fall at the edge of the frame. When coupled to anamorphic front, this can greatly add to the overall impact of the 'streak flare.'
I would expect more flare from an older model such as the 'Zebra' or pre '2' model called simply the 'Helios 44' (simple golden coating) - or the KMZ Helios 44-2 with green and yellow distance markings (this model should compliment your kowa 8z's flare colour the best). These are the better lenses to achieve flares with, as they are the earlier models that have less refined coatings and are more prone to bouncing light inside the optic edges when wide at f2. Having an older model such as the KMZ Helios 44-2 will greatly increase flare when opened up.
Other lenses worth considering (not primarily for 'crazy' flares) are the Pentacon preset type, 14-15 blades ensure circular aperture throughout stops - resulting in constant oval bokeh when paired with your Kowa. The 135mm pentacon f2.8, Meyer Orestor 100mm 2.8 and TAIR-11A 135mm f2.8 are particularly good for anamorphic use.
As for light source, the LED lights in squares will give a blocky diffused streak (as do fluorescent tubes/kino's), best to use a point source (such as the sun for exteriors) or for interiors - a single bright lamp such as a single chip LED desk lamp...or even better a tungsten/halogen light source. A very cheap light to use for some interior shoot's like your example video can be a 'pinspot' - a par-36 lamp that is very pokey and can be easily rigged on a stand or set on the floor to give a shaft of light that you can maneuver to lens in and out of :
There are LED 'pinspot' versions out there that are also good - that have focusable spots, they are lighter to rig but can flicker at some shutter speeds. (but tungsten lamp tends to give a nicer look IMHO and almost immune to flicker at most shutter speeds).
Thanks for the very comprehensive answer!! I'm shooting on a GH4, but with the speed booster, so I think I'm cropping at 1.7 ish... I'm also in anamorphic 4:3 mode, so not sure if that effects things too?
I've attached some images of the Helios 44-2... Does the 1st two digits of the serial number reflect the date? That a good one you reckon?
I'll look into all the lenses you mention! The lighting advise is VERY useful too..
-
I recently compared the horizontal flare on the Helios to a Nikon 50mm f1.8 both with the Sankor 16c attached. I found the Helios gave a more subtle flare and the Nikon a stronger 'blue line' horizontal flare.
Ah, thanks! Good to know, and another lens to consider. I was in need of justification to spend my not very hard earned money.... I shall go back to scouring ebay in the quest for another lens to try. I'll look up the Nikon,,, might be a good shout as hopefully there's a better Nikon to Canon adapter than the M42 ones, which seem a bit loose...
-
I don't know the classic anamorphic streaky look. The Helios is great with the Kowa and the Jupiter 85mm is a perfect addition (they are very prone to flares). If you choose a modern multicoated lens there is much less flare. The thing is though that anamorphics were not invented to produce flares or oval bokeh. They determine the composition and you can shoot with longer lens and get more shallow depth. It is a matter of the subject if you go the anamorphic route or not. But nowadays nearly everything is shot/cropped in 2.40. Not sure if even L. Trier does it now instead of his dogmas (didn't he say they are obsolete?)
So I just meant the cliche' long anamorphic flares, by "the streaky look".... Well, personally, I think the real thing looks a million times better than the short cropped digital thing, but maybe I'm just a bit keen as it's all new to me.... I guess it's obvious that the characteristics of the taking lens will show through in the work, but I just wondered how much and how different they are. I'll buy a jupiter 9 and do a comparison... If nothing else, the different focal lengths would be handy.
-
I'm shooting on a Kowa 8Z and am currently using a Helios 44-2 58 F2 as a taking lens. I've found it surprisingly hard to get flares that resemble the classic anamorphic streaky look.. I've only really taken it out on one shoot, but I've had a play around with is quite a bit and a mate mentioned that the taking lenses will (obviously) influence the shot looks, but I wondered if changing the taking lens would change the flare characteristics substantially?
Like I say, I've only taken it out once and I was pointing it right into the light most of the time (video below), although obviously not on the silly grade time lapses.
I've been hunting around on ebay and am considering the following, but can anyone tell me how much difference they're going to make, or show me some footage from a similar set-up? I'm not unhappy with the Helios, and perhaps it's not flaring because of LED lights in squares, instead of one focussed light source...
Potential Lenses:
Rokkor 58 1.2 or 1.4
Jupiter 9 85 F2
Carl Zeiss Jenna 80 F2.8
Reckon these are worth the investment, or will it make no difference?
-
Just made this little video.. Some of the first stuff I've shot anamorphic after buying a Kowa 8Z. Pretty terrible test, as I got out of bed too late and lost the sunlight, so it turned into a very low light test.
-
Hi Mat
Would you consider selling the animorphic lens seperately. I'd be very interested in buying it. Thanks. Dan
What Mount is this lens?
In: Cameras
Posted
Just brought this lens which was listed as M42... It isn't and I don't know what this is. Can somebody help me out.
Thanks